S& CB (2010), 22 , 175–208 0954–4194

Reviews

Thomas Dixon the scene by asking the question ‘What Science and Religion – A Very Short are science-religion debates all about?’ Introduction before considering the philosophy of sci- Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. ence in more detail in the context of 150pp. pb. £7.99 ISBN 978-0-19-929551-7 Galileo. In Chapter 3 he moves on to ask the question ‘Does God act in nature and The Very Short Introduction series by if so how?’ before looking at Darwin and Oxford University Press is designed for Evolution in more detail in Chapter 4 and the reader who is new to a subject area. the Creationism and Intelligent Design Its aim is to provide with a brief, bal- movements in Chapter 5. Finally, in the anced and very accessible introduction to last chapter he considers the impact of the topic that demands no previous modern neuroscience on our understand- knowledge. This volume adds to a grow- ing of the mind and morality and how this ing list of titles on a wide range of topics, may influence the ways we think about now numbering nearly 200. The author of human behaviour and religious experi- this volume, Thomas Dixon, is a lecturer ence. He ends by looking to the future and at Queen Mary, University of London, concludes that the debate will continue. and a member of the International Soci- ety for Science and Religion. He is an Looking to the future there is every expert on modern intellectual history reason to believe that science and reli- who writes regularly for The Times Lit- gion will both continue to flourish, to erary Supplement and this is reflected in enlighten, to inspire as well as to frus- the clarity and lively style of his writing trate, to obfuscate, and to oppress. Some which makes this book a pleasure to people may wish that one half of this read. He starts out by recognising the essentially modern pairing could be dis- commonly held belief that Science and posed of, or could be persuaded to relin- Religion are in conflict as promoted by quish its troublesome claims to authority the likes of Richard Dawkins, but notes in some sphere or other sphere of knowl- that ‘recent academic writing on the sub- edge, morality or politics. But such people ject has been devoted primarily to under- should be careful what they wish for. mining the notion of an inevitable con- Would they really prefer to live in a soci- flict’. His stated aim in writing the book ety where everyone agreed about the is ‘to look historically at how we came to question that this book has been about? think as we do about science and reli- What sort of place would that be? gion, to explore philosophically what pre- conceptions about knowledge are For many readers of this journal, involved, and to reflect on the political Thomas Dixon’s Very Short Introduction and ethical questions that often set the to Science and Religion will provide few unspoken agenda for these intellectual new insights; nor would they find much debates’. In my view he does this in a to disagree with. But what this book does very balanced manner and I found his do superbly is to address the topic in a approach very logical and easy to follow. very accessible and balanced manner that would make it an ideal introduction The book has six chapters and in all of to someone new to the topic, whether or them the main emphasis is on the rela- not they came from either a religious or tionship between science and the Christ- scientific background. I would recom- ian faith, although other faiths such as mend it highly. Judaism and Islam are considered where they have a distinctive contribution to Andrew Halestrap is a Professor of Bio- make. In the first chapter, the author sets chemistry at the University of Bristol.

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 175 Book Reviews

Nancy K. Frankenberry palaeontology. The notes that the editor The Faith of Scientists in their Own provides on each scientist’s contribution Words to their field of study and the biblio- Princeton, NJ: Princeton University graphical notes all serve to make this a Press, 2008. 523 hb. £20.95. ISBN 978-0- useful resource for further reading. As 691-13487-1 such the book is both readable for the amateur and a good starting place for the It has always been easy to oversimplify academic. and caricature the religious position of renowned scientists and now we have a It has to be recognised that in a book book that gives us the evidence to do that such as this, the hand of the editor is nec- far more intelligently. That may sound essarily strong both in the selection of like faint praise, but actually this is a the scientists around whom the chapters very good book that takes the reader are structured and in the material included. The extracts from original directly to the source documents of scien- material are necessarily fragmented tists musing on issues of faith, from those which makes the guiding notes of the edi- working at the dawn of the scientific rev- tor invaluable. These are extremely well olution to today. In that sense, this is as written and introduce in a succinct way near as we are going to get to the ‘horse’s the slightly more obscure and sometimes mouth’. quirky writings of the scientists them- There is no doubt that this book is an selves. However, while recognising the ambitious project and the author’s influence of the editor it has to be said expertise in the field of the philosophy of that the book is not seeking to drive a religion comes through (the author is the specific agenda other than to follow the John Phillips Professor of Religion at development of the shifting relationship Dartmouth College, New Hampshire). between science and religion. There is no Frankenberry has selected twenty one strong polemic or editorial comment on scientists working over the last 400 years the broad range of perspectives con- and collected some of their original mate- tained within the work. This book is a rial that relates to the science/faith inter- genuine attempt to let the scientists face. She has provided an introduction of speak for themselves and as such it them to place them in their historical works well as a valuable contribution in context, commented on their specific the science/faith dialogue and is to be work in order to help the reader navigate commended. the documents and then placed extracts Peter Lynch is a Baptist Minister in from those documents to complete each Somerset and formerly a professional chapter. The resulting collection spans geologist. the period from Galileo (1564-1642) to Stephen Hawking (1942- ) and encom- passes both devout believers like Free- Jerry A Coyne man Dyson and ardent atheists like Why Evolution is True Richard Dawkins. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2009. 309 pp. hb. £14.99. ISBN 978 0 19 Does it work? On the whole – yes. The 923084 6 summaries are helpful. The layout of the book gives the reader a good perspective The author’s message in this attractive on how thought has developed through book is comprehensible. Jerry Coyne spe- the ages. The scientists selected range cialises in evolutionary genetics at the from the highly renowned such as Dar- University of Chicago. Demonstrating win, Einstein and Hawking to others who expertise in his own field of study he also may be less familiar working in fields of shows an extensive and precise knowl- anthropology, physics, cell biology and edge of the fauna and flora he uses to

176 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews illustrate his thesis. The confrontation branchial arches [not gill slits in the between evolution and religious funda- human fetus (80)]. In animals, the basic mentalism is a recurring theme perhaps forelimb structure in the whale’s flipper because ‘creationism’ is not a uniquely and the bat and bird wing, are similar. American dilemma. The lack of functional wings in the ostrich and kiwi still fit this basic pat- As an evolutionary biologist the author tern. emphasises that speciation arises by nat- ural selection from a common ancestry. In chapter 4, Coyne provides an excel- Each organism resulting from this bifur- lent account of the geography of our cation may possibly be better adapted to world in relation to evolution. Comparing a particular niche in nature. Coyne posits oceanic with continental islands he notes that the transitional forms in birds and the absence of fresh water fish, amphib- whales occur at the times predicted and ians, reptiles and mammals on oceanic, supports the truth of evolution that he volcanic islands and contrasts this with believes is without a tenable rival. The continental islands where these groups origin of birds from therapod dinosaurs is occur, persuasive evidence for evolution. supported by fossils found in China dat- ing from 135-110 million years ago Coyne then provides answers to puz- [mya]. The fossil evidence also supported zling problems that can now be explained by DNA studies show that whales have by continental drift. In this case most descended from even-toed ungulates, the species are already in place on the land artiodactyls of 30 mya. and adjacent continental shelf. When Gondwanaland split apart about 170 The author states that science is the mya the land masses transported their pre-eminent story of our age and that biota with them. Hence the cacti of the evolution indicates humanity’s place in Americas, storing water in fat stems, are the extraordinary spread of life. Evolu- not found in Australia, Asia or Africa. In tion operates by a mechanism of stagger- these places it is the euphorbs, with a bit- ing simplicity: the selection of the small ter, milky sap that are found and may helpful inherited variations in an indi- even resemble cacti. The author ques- vidual which enhance its ability to sur- tions why a creator would place different vive. The design now seen in nature, plants in these diverse areas of the according to Darwin and A R Wallace, is world? The marsupials of Australia and the result of a materialistic process that placentals found elsewhere may resem- did not require supernatural interven- ble each other. He also demonstrates the tion. Coyne believes that resistance to importance of geological isolation in this this idea stems largely from pervasive matter of the origin of new species. The dogma, especially from the ‘creationists’. author points out that the ‘creationist’ beliefs concerning these matters of fact In the first chapter Coyne explains are illogical but their attitudes may be Charles Darwin’s novel idea that immune to change. accounts for the relatedness throughout the biota. Linnaeus, recognising this As a generalisation the oldest fossils nested hierarchy in nature proceeded occur in the earlier geological strata. The with its classification. Many readers, photosynthetic bacteria were present in alerted to this new theory, accepted that the first two billion years of life on earth. natural theology had now been van- Then geological seams occur with mainly quished. bones, shells, teeth and especially plank- ton of marine origin. More recent fossils In Coyne’s view embryology provides tend to resemble modern species living in the strongest evidence for evolution. All the areas. vertebrates follow a prescribed develop- mental pattern, in this example the six ‘How sex drives evolution’ in chapter 6

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 177 Book Reviews raises new and fascinating information Michael Pfundner in discussion based on the author’s extensive knowl- with Ernest Lucas edge in this field. This is an informative Think God, Think Science: read, excellently written. Coyne contin- Conversations on Life, the Universe ues: ‘We are contingent products of the and Faith blind and mindless process of natural Milton Keynes: Paternoster. 2008. selection’ while acknowledging that the 112pp. pb. £9.49. ISBN 978-1-84227-609- fossil hominid record is far from com- 9 plete. A number of genes distinguish us from chimpanzees. In hominid evolution This is an excellent brief treatment of the bipedal walking appears before there was problems science presents to biblical a significant increase in brain size. interpretation and traditional Christian doctrines. The issues are clarified and the Coyne writes, ‘Everywhere we look in problem for Christians in the past as well nature, we see animals that seem beauti- as for the present are described and a fully designed to fit their environment,’ modern understanding offered. and, quoting Darwin, ‘he completely replaced centuries of certainty about The introductory section is gripping divine design with the notion of a mind- and important. It vividly describes our less, mechanistic process – natural selec- society’s loss of faith and meaning and tion – that could accomplish the same then outlines how Christianity and sci- result’. Neither scientist answers the ence have related to each other since posit of Romans 1:19ff. The author con- they both began. At first Christianity siders that Darwin relied mainly on anal- seemed to support science, later on came ogy to make his case: the well-known suc- conflicts. Significant personalities who cess of breeders in transforming animals will be familiar to the general reader are and plants into organisms suitable for introduced and their place in history food, pets and decoration was accepted by clarified. him as a good parallel of the outcome of natural selection operating over aeons. The next section, ‘The sky’, deals with Coyne says that evolution is the natural the relevance of cosmology to the faith. In selection of indifferent mutations, a fil- the face of the Big Bang are we utterly tering process, not chance affecting the insignificant? These more philosophical individual only. problems are discussed and modern understanding of the creation narrative Coyne provides a wealth of relevant is presented. information supporting his carefully argued views and has justified the title The third section, ‘The cell’, is devoted chosen for his book. As shown, the evi- to evolution. The story is of Darwin’s dence for relatedness throughout nature development of an idea that had been is now overwhelming. I would suggest toyed with in the past and how it has that this book be read together with ‘Cre- since been established. As before, the ation or Evolution: do we have to choose?’ ideas are set out in their historical con- by Denis Alexander and ‘The language of text, both that of science and of the God’ by Francis S Collins, head of the church. The three Christian responses of Human Genome project in the States. creationism, intelligent design and The reader of Coyne’s book will be better acceptance of evolution but not Darwin- informed regarding the dialogue between ism are dealt with as appropriate. science and religion. The final chapter, ‘The Faith’, deals Ken Mickleson has retired from paedi- with the scientific approach to the Bible atrics, has a theological qualification that grew up in the nineteenth century and is interested in the truth in sci- and reached its culmination in the works ence and the Christian scriptures. of Bultmann. This is the first time that I

178 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews have found a treatment of biblical criti- seven parts that work well together, but cism in a book about Science and Faith which are self-contained and as such are and it is most welcome and relevant. The useful for quick reference. Each part is chapter goes on to look briefly at modern prefaced with an introduction by Cun- problems with central Christian beliefs. ningham. These are done well and are short enough to be worth reading. The question and answer format makes for a smooth conversational style Part one examines methodological but means that topics are not readily issues and focuses on how literalism, found again after reading; a problem metaphor, models and myth function in which is made worse by the lack of an the interpretation of the Bible, experi- index. However this is not supposed to be ence and science. The selection from a reference book but rather a fairly sim- Charles Hodge is a wonderful and highly ple introduction to the issues with help- nuanced example of how methodology ful Endnotes on some of the important can be resolutely theological, while the people mentioned and a challenging final ideas contained in McFague’s chapter on summing up at the end of the book. the importance of metaphor in language and thought should form a basic part of The striking cover and easy style,to any student’s higher education. Part two say nothing of the quality of the work, gives an overview of the argument and should make this very useful for young ideas behind modern evolutionary the- people including non Christians. How ory, with selections giving Darwin’s gen- popular its approach to the interpreta- eral argument, the history leading up to tion of parts of the Bible will be in the and post-Darwin, and the limits of what church generally I don’t know, but that is we can know about evolution. all the more reason for its wide use. I think there is a lot of literalism in the Parts three and four, on creationism church which preachers do not like to dis- and intelligent design, comprise the only agree with. This book should help them weak part of the book. Part three con- see that other interpretations of the tains just the first two chapters of Gene- Bible are not just possible but necessary sis and a single selection about creation- today, and do not conflict with the central ism by historian Ron Numbers. It is teachings of the Christian faith. unfortunate that Cunningham has cho- sen to put the Genesis passage here as it Owen Thurtle is a General Medical leaves the impression that Genesis 1-2 Practitioner, Sunday school teacher falls within the exclusive purview of cre- and occasional defender of evolution. ationists. Many theologians would be unhappy with this. The creationists’ Mary Kathleen Cunningham (ed.) interpretation of Genesis – far from God and Evolution: A Reader being the only valid approach – is actu- London: Routledge, 2007. 408pp. pb. ally not a very good interpretation at all. £19.79. ISBN 978-0-415-38014-0 Numbers’ historical survey of various creationist movements is very well writ- So far as this reviewer can tell, the main ten and interesting, but might not one purpose of ‘readers’ is to help instructors creationist have been allowed in to state and students by removing some of the their case personally? work of finding helpful passages to read, and to free them from photocopying copi- On intelligent design, Cunningham ous amounts of material, thereby avoid- includes a selection from Paley, helpful ing the treacherous shoals of copyright because of his notoriety and infamy in law. natural theology. She links the intelli- gent design argument of Michael Behe to God and Evolution: A Reader, by Mary historical arguments to God from the Kathleen Cunningham, is arranged in design of nature. Responding directly to

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 179 Book Reviews

Behe’s argument is a chapter by Ken Louis Caruana (ed.) Miller. In this reviewer’s opinion, Miller Darwin and Catholicism: the Past and does not engage fully with Behe’s argu- Present Dynamics of a Cultural ment. It is also odd that William Demb- Encounter ski’s arguments are not mentioned, even London and New York: T & T Clark, though they form an important part of 2009. 230 pp. ISBN: 978-0-567-25672-0 many cases for ID. As the editor of this book observes, Part five deals with naturalism and despite the abundance of work on the includes two passages by Dawkins and relationship of Darwin’s thought to one by Dennett which argue that Dar- Christianity, little has focused on the win, through the discovery of a process relationship of Darwin’s thought to which can bring about the appearance of Roman Catholicism. The main purpose of design without the intervention of an this book is to discuss ‘the impact of Dar- intelligence, not only allows one to be an win on Catholicism’ (2), and by ‘taking ‘intellectually fulfilled atheist’, but very Darwin’s empirical work as the core of a nearly requires it. Mary Midgley and cultural paradigm’ (4) to show how that Michael Ruse give short but incisive paradigm has interacted, and continues responses questioning the logic of apply- to interact, with Catholic theology, phi- ing evolutionary theory outside of biol- losophy, and Church teaching. In the ogy. light of John Paul II’s 1996 statement to Parts six and seven contain selections the Pontifical Academy of Sciences that by theologians of various traditions evolution is ‘more than a hypothesis’, a showing how evolutionary theory and book like this on the history of the grow- theology can be happy bed-mates. Part ing acceptability of Darwinian themes six is generally more conservative or within Catholic intellectual contexts is orthodox, while part seven contains con- overdue. Every one of the fifteen essays is tributions from revisionist and feminist of the highest quality, full of valuable theologians. Jürgen Moltmann’s contri- insights and deserving a book in its own bution in part six stands out as being of right. They are masterpieces of interdis- exceptional quality. Nearly all the selec- ciplinary scholarship and at the cutting tions rely on a ‘kenotic’ theology of cre- edge of the science/religion conversation. ation, in addition to rejecting the doc- The editor is based at Heythrop College, trine of divine impassibility as inappro- London. Of the fifteen contributors, seven priate. While these may be widely-held have American, six European academic positions among theologians today, it is affiliations, with one from Taiwan. unfortunate that no clear dissenting The body of the book is divided into voice has been found. three categories of essay, dealing respec- In God and Evolution: A Reader, Mary tively with the historical, philosophical Kathleen Cunningham has made a very and theological aspects of the Darwin and helpful contribution to anyone thinking Catholicism connection. The three cate- about the issues raised for Christian gories focus the essays convincingly with- belief by evolutionary theory. The minor out being constraining. The written styles problems are far outweighed by the high are clear, though the wide range of level of most of the selections, their organ- diverse specialisms broached will cause ization, and the short introductions. nearly every reader to be taken out of his or her depth at some point. This, of James Crocker is a former research course, is not a criticism of the book but a assistant at the Faraday Institute for reflection of its breadth. For the present Science and Religion, St Edmund’s reviewer the most striking essay is one by College, Cambridge and MSt student Nicholas Rescher, in which he argues that at Oriel College, Oxford. the hypothesis of the intelligent design of

180 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews the universe does not, surprisingly, these being investigated in the essay as require the postulation of an intelligent possibly post-Darwinian processes designer. The most interesting connection responding unconsciously to Darwinian in the book is that between Aquinas and paradigms. Darwin, made by Fainche Ryan, who looks for the seeds of evolutionary Cyprian Love is a Benedictine monk of thought in the medieval theologian. Glenstal Abbey, Co. Limerick, Ireland. In the book’s historical category of essays, I would have liked to see an essay R. John Elford and D. Gareth linking Darwin and John Henry New- Jones (eds.) man via the notion of gradual develop- A Tangled Web: Medicine and ment. Such an essay would discuss New- Theology in Dialogue man’s theory of the gradual development Bern: Peter Lang, 2009. 289 pp. pb. £35. of Christian doctrine in the Church side ISBN 978-3-03911-541-9 by side with Darwin’s theory of the evo- In the early days of the ‘new genetics’ a lution of species. Why did these two number of American theologians famous theories, in many ways similar, bemoaned the fact that not enough peo- develop around the same time and in the ple in their discipline were engaging in same country? Where did this general discussion about the rapidly moving sci- idea of some kind of all-pervasive and ence. The implications of applying new slow development, within which Darwin genetic and genomic knowledge were, and Newman both choose to frame their they said, too wide-ranging and signifi- particular subject matters, originate? In cant to be left to the attention of scien- both men’s theories we have the idea of a tists and medics. Be that as it may, it is gradual ascent to greater perfection gen- equally true that these issues are too erated by a prior process of confronta- important to be left to the attention of tion. Thus, for Darwin, the contest of nat- ural selection leads to stronger species, theologians: we need dialogue. And thus while, for Newman, a historical contest of A Tangled Web should be a welcome addi- orthodoxy and heresy leads to a more tion to the literature. However, I need to purified clarification of Christian doc- stress that this is not the first book on trine in the Church. which medical / biomedical and theologi- cal authors have collaborated, nor was A major motive in the rise of twenti- the meeting at Liverpool Hope Univer- eth-century biblical studies was to sity (from which the book grew) the first retrieve the authority of the Bible after a of its kind. Indeed, there is a long tradi- fundamentalist hermeneutic, as exempli- tion in the UK of debate between medics fied by a literal reading of Genesis, had and clerics. In the eighteenth century for been discredited by the impact of Dar- example, Dr Alured Clarke became Dean win’s theories. This rise of biblical studies of Exeter and was also co-founder of the was rapid in the Protestant world, to be Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital. For followed, after much heel dragging, in the many years, until quite recently, the Catholic world. The Catholic Church Alured Clarke Society met regularly for finally reconciled itself officially to mod- doctors and theologians to discuss ern biblical methodologies through the together issues of mutual concern encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu (1943). (including the ‘new genetics’). There is a I would have liked, in this collection of very slight but detectable undercurrent essays, to see one which asked whether that the authors of this book think of the knock-on effect of Darwin could be themselves as pioneers. This comes over felt right through this development of in the literature on which they have (and biblical studies, affecting not just Protes- have not) drawn. Gareth Jones is not the tant but Catholic forms of scholarship, only medic/biomedical scientist to have

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 181 Book Reviews written about these issues from a Christ- authored by Gareth Jones (one of these ian perspective. I can, off the top of my with a co-author, Maja Whitaker) and head, think of several others, none of one by Gerard Mannion. Readers famil- whom are quoted. There are also theolo- iar with Jones’ writing will recognise gians who have written in this area. Two some of the themes here, including a are quoted, namely Celia Deane-Drum- warm embracing of new medical tech- mond and John Habgood. But where is nologies, a liberal attitude to the pre- mention of those American theologians implantation human embryo (I go some who initially complained about the lack of the way with him on this) and warn- of theological engagement with modern ings against scaremongering. Concerning biomedical science (as mentioned above)? the last point, it is true that discussion Audrey Chapman, Ronald Cole-Turner often focuses on worst-case scenarios but and Ted Peters, amongst others, have nevertheless I think that Jones is too made significant contributions but one blasé. Firstly, contrary to what he looks in vain for reference to their work. implies, there are some eugenic under- So, the authors of A Tangled Web are not tones in genetic testing and secondly, we the pioneers they seem to think them- have learned in science that things that selves to be. Nevertheless, they certainly seem impossible today become common- have their chance to inform and extend place in years to come. So, while we our thinking at the Medicine-Theology should not concentrate on the extremes, interface. Whether or not they have suc- neither should we be complacent about ceeded will depend to some extent on how what might become possible. In addition much the reader has already engaged to this more familiar material, some with these issues. For my part, I confess parts of section two do bring new that despite the book’s several good fea- insights. The chapter concerned with the tures, I am overall a little disappointed. ethics of the human body is helpful and informative while it is interesting to see After a short Preface by John Elford the inclusion of the Jones-Whitaker (an ethicist) and a long Introduction by chapter on scientific fraud. I note that Gareth Jones (a medic/medical scientist), this topic has also found its way of late the book is divided into three main sec- into some ‘secular’ bioethics books. tions, followed by John Elford’s conclud- Finally in this section, Mannion returns ing chapter. The first section is entitled to his community theme with an excel- Theological Background and consists of lent chapter (one of the best in the book four chapters written by Gerard Man- in my opinion), ‘Genetics and the Ethics nion, John Elford, Adam Hood and Ann of Community’. Marie Mealey. These chapters are cer- tainly interesting and each would work Part three is entitled Regulation and well as a stand-alone paper. I especially Policy. This title does not immediately liked Mannion’s emphasis on the Christ- inspire and yet for me, this was overall ian church as a moral community (it the best section in the book and although reminded me of one of the major themes I am not in agreement with the authors in Richard Heys’ excellent text, The on all points, I found these three chapters Moral Vision of the New Testament). readable, interesting and challenging. However, it is difficult to discern from Jones uses a number of scenarios to make these four chapters exactly where the some pertinent points about regulatory book is heading. Several different procedures. Stephen Bellamy, writing on approaches are taken and there does not the role of public consultation in deter- seem to be any real engagement with the mining policy, laments the lack of real biomedical issues. ethical thinking on some issues, while the thrust of Mannion’s chapter in this sec- The second section, Moral Boundaries, tion may be discerned from a sentence in contains five chapters, four of which are his opening paragraph. ‘[The chapter]

182 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews seeks to make the case that, rather than involved in this teaching would take the ethical horse drawing the legislative exception to Gerard Mannion’s comments cart and, in turn, the legislative horse that ethics is being taught just to cover drawing the scientific cart… the opposite our backs (251) without any interest in is all too often the case.’ He does indeed ethical theory (250). Doubtless this is make his case well, but I would comment true in some cases but I know that many that although we might use ethics to life science academics have worked hard derive legislation in order to limit how we to familiarise themselves with ethical should apply scientific discoveries, no leg- theory and moral philosophy in order to islation in the world can stop scientific help their students understand the discoveries being made (unless the prac- processes of ethical decision making. The tice of science is prohibited altogether). fact that ‘Teaching Ethics to Bioscience Since the pace of scientific discovery is so Students’ is now by far the longest run- fast, it is almost inevitably going to pre- ning Special Interest Group of the HE cede appropriate legislation. Academy (formerly LTSN) Centre for Bioscience bears witness to this: the Finally, John Elford’s concluding chap- group’s regular workshops are always ter provides a good overview of and com- well attended, even seven years after the mentary on the debate. I especially group was founded. affirm his view that Christians cannot ignore modern biomedical science (a My second point here is that I think point that, as I mentioned at the start of that a major opportunity has been this review, several US theologians made missed. Jones mentions a range of Chris- back in the 1990s): ‘[the] extreme… of tian attitudes to the early human embryo doing nothing, or of Luddism… is not an in his chapter on Regulatory Procedures option for serious and morally motivated and Mannion writes briefly about the people, particularly Christians.’ However, moral status of the early embryo in the as he points out, the other extreme, of chapter on Genetics and the Ethics of allowing everything and anything is also Community. However, nowhere is there morally unacceptable. We are thus left an in-depth ethical and theological with the significant challenge of finding analysis of this topic. Attitudes to the early embryo underlie our thinking on our way between these two extremes IVF, pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, and, I would add, different Christians stem cells and cloning. Whatever one’s will come to different conclusions about view of the early human embryo, a chap- what that way should be. ter about it, written very specifically Finally I need, sadly, to mention two from theological and moral philosophical more negative points. The first of these is standpoints would have proved very illu- a matter of factual correctness. Gareth minating. It is a great pity that A Tan- Jones is wrong to suggest (12) that scien- gled Web does not contain such a chapter. tists are unlikely to receive ethical train- John Bryant is Professor Emeritus of ing. I know from personal experience Cell and Molecular Biology at the Uni- that since the mid-1990s, ethics has been versity of Exeter and co-chair of the introduced into many degree courses in Centre for Bioscience/HE Academy the life sciences, often as a result of both Special Interest Group on Teaching student and academic staff interest. This Ethics to Bioscience Students. trend was accelerated in 2002 when the UK’s Quality Assurance Agency intro- duced ethics into its benchmarks for life science degree programmes. At the time of the most recent survey about 75% of relevant degree programmes conformed to this benchmark. Further, many of us

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 183 Book Reviews

Helge S. Kragh that, neither by natural agencies of inan- Entropic Creation: Religious Contexts imate matter, nor by the operations arbi- of Thermodynamics and Cosmology trarily effected by animated Creatures, Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008. 272pp. hb. can there be any change in the amount of £60. ISBN 0754664147 mechanical energy in the universe; and the belief that Creative Power alone can Helge Kragh is widely known in the his- either call into existence or annihilate tory of science community as author of a mechanical energy, enters the mind with number of well received books on the his- perfect conviction.’ (quoted 29). Men such tory of physics (for example Dirac: A Sci- as Joule agreed wholeheartedly with entific Biography (CUP, 1990) or Quan- Thomson, while others, though unwilling tum Generations: A History of Physics in to make positive statements about the the Twentieth Century (Princeton, 1999)). deity, certainly saw the law of conserva- He is an established and respected histo- tion of energy as at least standing rian, and so it came as something of sur- against materialism. prise to me to discover that the current The second law can be stated as infor- book is an edited version of Kragh’s doc- mally as: In any process some energy is toral thesis from 2007. always dissipated as heat and hence lost As one might expect from a doctoral to useful work. This gave rise to the idea thesis, Entropic Creation is a substantial of the heat death of the universe, namely, and scholarly work with a fairly tight that eventually the universe would run focus and detailed engagement with a down and would be of uniform tempera- large array of primary and secondary ture at all points. It was the second law sources which are referenced and that gave rise to the entropic creation expanded upon via over 700 footnotes.In argument and Kragh states the argu- short, it is a weighty read. However, this ment (48) thus: weight of scholarship is what makes the I The entropy of the world book so rewarding, with the author open- increases continually. ing a window on an important era II Our present world is not in a (focused primarily on 1850-1920) and state of very high entropy. upon a debate within that period which is III Hence the world must be of finite not widely known. age. The entropic creation argument arose IV If the world had a beginning, it from the development of the new science must have been created. of heat in the 1840s and 1850s. In this V If created, there must be a cre- era we find the formulation of the first ator, that is, God must exist. and second laws of thermodynamics (i.e. Thus the entropic creation argument is that the total energy of a closed system is an argument about beginnings and the a constant, and that the total entropy of use of such beginnings to infer the exis- a closed system always increases) by men tence of God. Kragh traces the uses of, such as Julius Robert Mayer, (1814- and attacks upon, the entropic creation 1878), Hermann von Helmholtz (1821- argument from 1850 up to as late as 1946 1894), Rudolf Clausius (1822-1888), when E. T. Whittaker made the last sub- James Prescott Joule (1818-1889) and stantive apologetic use of it. Perhaps William Thomson (1824-1907). In the unsurprisingly Kragh shows that many nineteenth century both laws were seen theists found the entropic argument in some circles to have theological signif- helpful and many atheists attacked it via icance. Thus for example Thomson saw a denial of one or more of the five points the idea of conservation of energy as a above. However, full play should be given sign of God as creator. Writing in 1851 he to the word many. Thus for example, stated ‘We may… regard it as certain some Catholic scholars were unenthusi-

184 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews astic about the argument, seeing apparently was ‘lastingly influenced by Thomism as more important as a valid the lyrical and spiritual power of evan- pointer to God than thermodynamics. Or gelical Christianity’ (174). In this slim indeed some atheists (for example volume he returns to these roots with an Bertrand Russell) were willing to impassioned attempt to convince a embrace the idea that the second law (imagined) Southern Baptist pastor of implied that the universe had a begin- the need for science and religion to join ning, but denied that this could be used forces to save life on an imperilled earth. as evidence for a divine creator. To a twenty-first century reader Russell’s Wilson has addressed a hypothetical view hardly sounds surprising, but it audience before in The Future of Life should be noted that most nineteenth (Knopf, 2002), where he began with an century atheists did in fact deny that the open letter to Henry David Thoreau. In universe had a beginning, positing either that book, the conceit serves as a com- an eternal or a cyclic universe. It seems pelling introduction to Wilson’s discus- that many of them feared that an accept- sion of the status and prognosis of life on ance of III above meant IV and V were earth and what needs to be done to pre- highly likely to follow. It is a fear that serve it. The conceit works rather less many modern atheists have unwisely well in the present volume. This is lost. because, whatever his childhood encounter with Christianity might have In Entropic Creation Helge Kragh involved and despite what seem to be the weaves a rich and nuanced historical best of intentions,Wilson apparently narrative drawing out the different ways finds it impossible to understand the thermodynamics was received and used audience he claims to be addressing, and by both theist and atheist. Any scholar his impatience with the imagined Baptist with a serious interest in the interaction clergyman is often all too evident. There between physical science and religion in may indeed be Southern Baptist pastors the nineteenth and early twentieth cen- who resemble the caricature who tury would do well to read it. emerges as Wilson’s dialogue partner, but Mark McCartney is a lecturer in math- I suspect that few Christians – Southern ematics at the University of Ulster. Baptist or not – will actually find them- selves represented by him. This is a shame, because Wilson is an authorita- Edward O. Wilson tive and compelling voice when he writes The Creation: An Appeal to Save Life about science, and his very decision to on Earth address people of religious belief ostensi- New York and London: W. W. Norton & bly on their own terms represents a rare Company, 2006. 175 pp. hb. $21.95. and telling condescension – a condescen- ISBN-13 978-0-393-06217-5 sion that reveals something of the grav- ity of the situation which Wilson believes Readers of this journal are unlikely to we face. require any introduction to E. O. Wilson, the Harvard naturalist whose ground- The book begins with a section that breaking contributions to behavioural describes, often in beautiful detail and and population biology, founding of the via well-chosen examples, the ‘creation’ field of sociobiology and work in conser- in which we live, the world around us vation biology are known far beyond the both near and far in all of its wonder and realm of academia. Wilson is also well- diversity. Along the way, Wilson includes known as an articulate advocate of secu- a brief but cogent attack on the recently lar humanism, but – as he is at pains to popular notion that ‘nature’ as such does point out in this book – he was raised in not exist or that it can be reduced merely Alabama as a Southern Baptist and to a socially-determined construct (22-

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 185 Book Reviews

25). He points out that our own experi- deserves our care whether or not it can ences as well as scientific data – for be seen to serve us directly. example, on the biodiversity of rainforest versus that of adjacent agricultural fields In any case, the task of ‘stewardship of – reveal the possibility of making gen- life’ that Wilson proposes is one that he uine distinctions between the humanised rightly expects ought to concern all of us, world and the natural world, however even if – as he charitably acknowledges – fuzzy the transition between the two. As Christians might not be comfortable Wilson points out, the planetary trend is expressing it quite as he does, as ‘ascend- almost inexorably away from the natural ing to nature’. The task as Wilson envi- sions it involves such things as moving and towards the humanised, with less towards a sustainable human population and less space for that which is truly wild and reducing our consumption, but above or even for functioning ecosystems. This all – and this is at the heart of his pro- is borne out by the astonishing rate of posal – it involves a one-off investment to species extinction, which is estimated for protect those areas that contain the land and freshwater species to be any- greatest number of earth’s species (91- where from 50 times to 500 times the 99). Wilson estimates the cost of this to pre-human baseline rate (79). The causes be 30 billion US dollars – a mere pit- of this are well-documented: habitat loss tance, he points out, compared to the esti- (including that caused by climate mated 30 trillion dollar rate of the change), invasive species, pollution, ecosystems services given us by the nat- human overpopulation and overharvest- ural environment (98). ing (75). The weakest section of the book – For Wilson, all this threatens not only which comes in the middle of an other- the integrity of nature and the basic wise clear and helpful explanation of material benefits with which it provides what the science of biology involves – is us, but it also goes against our own Wilson’s brief foray into the history of sci- human nature, which bears traces of our ence, where he propagates time-worn long genetic heritage of intimacy with stereotypes about the advance of science the rest of the living world. Here as else- in the face of religious opposition. (He where in the book, biodiversity and non- observes early on that Darwin’s scientific human life in general are valued by Wil- discoveries were possible only when he son pre-eminently for the services (phys- had ‘first abandoned Christian dogma’ ical and what might be called ‘spiritual’) (7)). Wilson’s conception of religious that other life renders to human beings. belief is perhaps glimpsed most clearly Although he predicts that ultimately our when he observes, ‘Without science, there ‘central ethic will shift’ such that we had to be religion’ (105). In other words, learn ‘to cherish all of life – not just our religion and science are alternative own’ (69), and he deftly attacks the explanations for reality; and so if we are notion of ‘exceptionalism’ (which claims to accept science, we must ultimately that the special status of human beings reject traditional religion, much as Wil- means that we can escape the ‘laws of son himself has done. Nature’)(82-90), Wilson’s own arguments for caring for creation nearly all derive Despite its many strong points, I unfor- from the value of other life for us. This tunately cannot think of anyone to whom approach is rooted in Wilson’s human- I would recommend this book. Most ism, and he understandably assumes Christians will be put off by the almost that a conservative Christian audience unrecognisable stereotype of their beliefs will share at least this human-centred that Wilson assumes they hold, and I ethic. Many Christians would nonethe- cannot think why anyone else would pre- less want to say that non-human life has fer to read this book to one of Wilson’s intrinsic value before God and thus many other excellent ones. There are in

186 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews any case many better books to recom- towards God’s world, and the theological mend to evangelical Christians whom we paradigm of creation-fall-redemption. might hope to convince of the need to The closing reflection by Margot Hodson care for creation. The value of this book is on Isaiah’s vision for sustainability primarily in the compelling example it reminds us that the Old Testament provides of how environmentalists, cli- prophets have much to teach us about mate-change activists and, indeed, con- living in God’s world. servation biologists are increasingly recognising the need to engage seriously The remainder of the book comprises with people of religious belief if we are to short chapters tackling a wide range of address the profound challenges being sustainability issues including agricul- posed to life on earth. ture (John Wibberley), biodiversity (Ghil- lean Prance), consumption (Brian Heap Jonathan Moo is assistant professor of and Flavio Comin), economics (Donald theology (biblical studies) at Whit- Hay) and waste management (David worth University, Spokane, Washing- Stafford and John Bryant). John ton. Houghton sets out the challenges of global warming and our reliance on fossil R. J. Berry (ed.) fuels for energy, and Joanne Green explores the injustices associated with When Enough is Enough: A Christian lack of access to clean, safe water. Each Framework for Environmental author presents an outline of sustainabil- Sustainability ity issues within their area of expertise Leicester: IVP, 2007. 212 pp. pb. £11.99. or interest, and it is this clear yet ISBN 978-1-84474-180-9 detailed analysis that is the most com- This collection of essays edited by R. J. pelling aspect of the book. Each chapter, Berry addresses an issue of crucial and to a certain extent, relates this to Christ- topical importance to us all. Originally ian faith and practice, although, in many papers given at a 2005 conference on ‘The cases, without much attempt to develop a Christian Framework for Sustainability’ sustained theological response. Many of it draws on the experience and expertise the authors suggest practical approaches of Christians working in a wide range of and actions that can be taken. areas to present a wealth of sobering and As one would expect in a collection of relevant reflection on living sustainably essays, there is variety in both the analy- with the rest of God’s creation. The book sis of the problems we face and the is heartily endorsed in a Foreword by the responses needed. Some chapters are Bishop of Liverpool, the Rt Revd James based on personal experience, for exam- Jones, and the individual chapters are ple Ghillean Prance draws on a lifetime’s framed by an Introduction and Epilogue work as a botanist in the Amazon rain- by Berry, who gives a brief historical forests to earth his reflections. Others overview of Christian responses to envi- are more technical and dense, for exam- ronmental issues and sets out compelling ple Donald Hay’s critique of economic reasons why sustainability should be a responses to sustainability, which was major concern of the church. harder for this reviewer to understand But what is ‘sustainability’? Dave fully. But all the authors are as one in Bookless explores this elusive concept maintaining that sustainability is an from a theological point of view, in one of issue that is inextricably linked to two theological chapters in the book, sug- authentic Christian faith and one that gesting that a Christian view of sustain- we should, and must, engage with seri- ability incorporates the notion of God as ously and reflectively. Recent years have creator and sustainer of the universe, seen the publication of a number of human responsibility, based on covenant, Christian responses to environmental

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 187 Book Reviews and sustainability issues, to which this uses the concept of kenosis, both human book makes a valuable contribution. and divine, to explore the creator/cre- Read it and be prepared to be challenged! ation relationship in the light of evolu- tionary science and our awareness of the Hilary Marlow lectures in Old Testa- vast numbers of creatures that fail to live ment in the Faculty of Divinity, Uni- fully to ‘self’. Humanity is able to go fur- versity of Cambridge. ther and give of self, a giving exemplified in the Incarnation. This leads to some Willem B. Drees, Hubert concrete suggestions as to how human Meisinger & Taede A. Smedes kenosis might express itself in joining (eds.) God’s work of healing the cosmos. The emergence of the ‘competing myths of Creation’s Diversity: Voices from nature and technology’ are traced by Theology and Science Alfred Kracher, who notes three attitudes London, New York: T&T Clark, 2008. towards nature: a desire for its preserva- 186 pp. pb. £29.99. ISBN 978-0-567- tion against exploitation, a wish to 03329-1 domesticate or control it and, in contrast This volume, in the ‘Issues in Science and to that, a desire to retain nature’s wild- Theology’ series, arises from the 2006 ness, albeit without harm to ourselves. ESSSAT conference. An introductory This mythology needs replacing. Further chapter by Willem Drees is followed by exploration of myths is found in Tony the opening conference address from Watling’s survey of three current Daniel Ciobotea (now Patriarch of the metaphors that may stimulate debate on Romanian Orthodox Church) that draws the relationship between humanity and on the work of Staniloea and reflects on nature: Deep Ecology, the Gaia hypothe- the limits of science. The other papers are sis, and the ‘epic of evolution’. The epic of divided between two sections although evolution is the scientific account trans- the ‘natural variation’ of a collection of muted into ‘a new transcultural creation conference papers (in topic, scope and myth, stressing the cosmos as a living quality) results in considerable diversity system’ (101). both within and between the two parts. I In the second, equally varied section, have focused more especially on those I ‘Sustaining Creation’s Diversity’, Sam found most interesting. Berry provides a helpful recent history of In part 1, ‘A Diversity of Visions of Cre- secular debate on sustainability and ation’, Anne Primavesi discusses the environmental law and calls for theologi- value of reflecting on the scale and cal engagement based on a Christian events of the geohistory of the world; con- calling to act as caretakers/stewards of sidering the ages and life forms that creation. A clear explanation of biodiver- passed before the appearance of human- sity, and its importance, is provided in ity helps us understand our existence as Jan Boersema’s essay, which concludes a gift from them for us and suggests that by noting a need for religions to help God has a relationship with the Earth ‘green’ their adherents’ world-views. and all living things. In the light of this However, very wisely, he also notes some perspective, treating natural resources caveats. Religions should ensure that as commodities to be bought and sold can their texts are not plundered for environ- be seen as sin. Focusing on the book of mentally friendly passages while ignor- Job, David Goodin notes, as do others, ing, or brushing aside, the less helpful that it relativises the importance of those parts. This hermeneutical reminder is things exalted by capitalism: the Joban one that too many well-meaning writers God ‘values the well-being of wild cre- ignore. Some contributors, including ation more than catering to humankind’s Chris Wiltshire and Peter Kirschen- happiness’ (49). Christopher Southgate mann, highlight the vagueness of the

188 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews concepts ‘sustainability’ and ‘diversity’ question of the book is whether or not and the often unexamined assumption evolution proceeds purely by chance or that sustaining diversity is a good. Wilt- can be seen to give expression to purpose. shire notes that few would promote the How does the philosophical framework of preservation of those life forms inimical emergent evolution provide evidence of to human flourishing, such as some purpose? viruses. Modern atheism, emboldened by the The blurb speaks of ‘environmental success of modern science and its reduc- engagement in the context of religious tionist method, declares confidently that convictions’, but in the final two papers the universe is simply an accident out of Zbigniew Liana draws on Popper to dis- which we humans have emerged by cuss diversity in beliefs within a faith chance. Our world-view is now infected and Dirk Evers considers Christian with the notion that since physics approaches to religious pluralism and reduces everything to a chaotic dance of scientific enquiry; neither specifically elementary particles there can be no discuss the environment. meaning to life. It is biology, however, and in particular evolution, based on random Generally, this collection presents a mutations, that has been most corrosive hugely varied, and sometimes thought- of belief in purpose. The logical continu- provoking set of approaches to the topic ity of reductionist explanations seems to of diversity. Its value to readers will undermine all our ‘higher’ level concepts depend on their background and inter- – leaving them ultimately as effects of ests. A few of the ‘scientific’ examples and merely physical causes. It is not however illustrations made me wince, as they simply the logical force of the argument betrayed a rather cursory or naive scien- that is a problem, it is that it persuades tific understanding, and there were us that any explanation that does not places where clarity seemed to have been proceed in this way isn’t an explanation lost in translation. However, generally at all. We have become conditioned to the quality of writing is clear and the accept only explanations that use reduc- papers should be accessible to readers of tionism in an unbroken chain to take us this journal. to something simple that we believe we Cherryl Hunt is a former biologist cur- understand. Herein lies the problem in rently engaged in research in the following the argument of this book, for, Department of Theology and Religion, ultimately, it cannot use this form of University of Exeter. explanation! It is not until the reader is more than halfway through that he or she discovers that emergent evolution is Jacob Klapwijk not an explanation in the conventional Purpose in the living world? Creation sense but a way of seeing and thinking and emergent evolution about other explanations that highlights Cambridge University Press, 2008. 311 their limitations. We find that Jacob pp. pb. £14.99. ISBN 978-0-521-72943-7 Klapwijk, an emeritus professor of phi- losophy, has been leading us to think When is an explanation not an explana- about our thinking. This is of course the tion? Answer: when it is a ‘philosophical purpose of philosophy! framework’. Lured by the sub-title, casual readers may begin reading this The first part of the book surveys mod- book in the hope of finding an explana- els of creation and provides a critique of tion, or at least a definition, of ‘emergent creationism and intelligent design as evolution’. If so, they will be disap- well as the category mistakes inherent in pointed, though they will not find the philosophical naturalism before intro- experience unrewarding. The central ducing the ideas of emergence that were

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 189 Book Reviews first developed towards the end of the There remains, however, a lingering nineteenth century. Klapwijk writes from doubt in my mind that since experience the perspective of the Catholic tradition needs to be interpreted we have to make and bases his critiques on the prescient some kind of faith commitment to make ideas of Augustine who first expressed any progress in understanding. The vali- the notion that time itself was created. dation of ‘emergent evolution’ therefore Thus creation needs no special interven- must remain incomplete. tions or designed features of irreducible complexity since everything is designed! This book is not an easy read. I found Furthermore Klapwijk separates himself it helpful to have a dictionary close by from theistic evolutionists by taking the when reading it. Klapwijk’s learning Augustinian view that evolution is the oozes from every page. His familiarity unrolling of a pre-written script. All the with disciplines beyond philosophy is features apparently revealed to us by impressive. Much of the book could be evolution are simply the effects of time described as ‘extensive ground clearing’ uncovering the inherent creaturely and in so doing he sweeps a wide range of aspects put there at the beginning of topics with his rigorous philosopher’s time itself. brush. His message is that purpose can- not be detected by reductive naturalism – This Augustinian perspective informs a change in perspective is required that the second part of the book where Klap- is sensitive to the way the world is. Evo- wijk considers the implications of emer- lution has produced a complex interlac- gent evolution in various contexts such ing and organic system where the emer- as culture, the philosophy of mind and gence of mind and awareness of logical the interface of science and faith. He connections is itself the evidence of pur- introduces emergence as a kind of ‘irre- poseful development. He provides no ducible novelty’ that defies explanation easy answers and no trite definitions of in reductionist terms. Thus properties the purpose of life. The connections to the emerge at various levels in creation that Christian’s hope in the Kingdom of God are not causally connected to lower levels are arrived at in the closing pages, but of being – in his philosopher’s jargon, this left for the individual to explore in per- is ‘ontological stratification’. The gaps sonal experience. This is a challenging between the levels simply have to be book and its satisfactions are gained by accepted as they are. At first sight this those who, like me, are not well-versed in seems a risky tactic – a kind of ‘God of philosophical discourse, only by careful the very thin gaps’ – since the idea of and thoughtful reading – and re-reading. ‘irreducibility’ had been comprehensively Paul Ewart is Head of Atomic and demolished earlier in the book in his Laser Physics at the University of treatment of Intelligent Design theory. Oxford. His escape from this trap has been pre- pared by his concept of emergence since it is not contingent upon the physical Alexei V. Nesteruk connections between levels. Thus even if The Universe as Communion: Towards physical explanations close the gaps, say, a Neo-Patristic Synthesis of Theology between neurons in the brain and and Science thought processes, the concepts of logic London: T & T Clark, 2008. 286 pp. hb. and ideas are independent of such physi- £75.00. ISBN-10 0-567-03327-9 cal relationships. Klapwijk is wisely aware of the dangers of developing a For the vast majority of Western Chris- metaphysics of emergence that could tians, to enter the world of Eastern lead to unprofitable speculations. He Orthodox thought is to begin an explo- counsels a rigorously empirical approach ration of a terra incognita in which the whereby experience is the final test. familiar landmarks of the West are either

190 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews missing or, when apparently present, has added to his previous work this turn out to be misleading. It is, for exam- important and impressive new book. ple, a world in which Protestants can Nesteruk is a cosmologist by profes- often, in the words of a nineteenth cen- sion, but he does not present his case in tury Russian theologian, be seen as noth- terms of cosmology or of any other scien- ing but ‘Crypto-Papists’. tific discipline. (Indeed, some might find The man who made that remark, the relative lack of reference to current Alexis Khomiakov, went on to explain scientific understanding in this book what he meant, using what he called ‘the somewhat disconcerting.) Rather, his concise language of algebra’. The West, main argument is presented partly in he said, ‘knows but one datum a; whether terms of the phenomenological tradition it be preceded by the positive sign +, as of philosophical thought and partly in with the Romanists, or with the negative terms of an appeal ‘to patristics as that -, as with the Protestants.’ For Orthodox historical and theological background Christians, he went on to explain, that a which is common to all Christian is simply irrelevant. Orthodox theology Churches’. His style, it must be said, does has been influenced neither by the not make for easy reading, and it may Augustinianism and scholasticism of well be that those who are unfamiliar Western medieval thought nor by the with both phenomenology and the Ortho- Protestant appropriation of (and partial dox tradition should do some background reaction against) this medieval inheri- reading before attempting to read him. tance. As a modern commentator has put For those with at least some background it, ‘Christians in the West… generally in one of these approaches to reality, start by asking the same questions, however, Nesteruk is able to point out although they may disagree about the intriguing links between them. answers. In Orthodoxy, however, it is not Ultimately, however, it is not the link- merely the answers that are different – age between phenomenology and the the questions themselves are not the Orthodox understanding that makes this same as in the West.’ book important, but its vision of the pos- What Khomiakov saw as true of the sibility of using resources from patristic relationship between the Western and thinking to develop a ‘neo-patristic syn- Eastern Christianities of his day thesis of theology and science’. To write a arguably remains true today, and not book that attempts to take us ‘towards’ least in relation to the dialogue between such a synthesis is an extremely ambi- science and theology. The relationship tious undertaking, and some – especially between God and the created order is those unconvinced by the phenomenolog- simply seen in a different way in the two ical tradition – may judge this ambition parts of the Christian world, and the to have been only partially fulfilled in this book. They will still, nevertheless, Eastern perspective – if it were ever to be surely remain grateful that the vision accepted in the Christian West – would has been set before them. inevitably affect almost all aspects of the Western dialogue between science and Christopher C. Knight is Executive theology. Up until very recently, however, Secretary of the International Society participants in this dialogue had few for Science and Religion and a priest resources to draw on to begin to gauge of the Orthodox Church. this potential contribution. Once they had read two very different assessments – Alexei Nesteruk’s Light From the East and Christopher Knight’s The God of Nature – there was, quite simply, little else to look at. Now, however, Nesteruk

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 191 Book Reviews

Thomas Jay Oord Randy Maddox’s chapter sketches out Divine Grace and Emerging Creation: different but significant ways in which Wesleyan Forays in Science and Wesleyan theology and science might Theology of Creation interact, and draws some careful lessons Eugene, Oregon: Pickwick, 2009. xiv + from Wesley’s own approach and context. 229pp. pb. $27.00. ISBN 13:978-1-60608- His approach is measured and judicious. 287-4 Apart from this opening chapter there is little here that will attract the non-spe- As the science and religion debate has cialist. The early chapters explore John matured, studies have tended to become Wesley’s understanding of science, and to less general and more concerned with the a lesser extent his philosophical presup- interaction between specific aspects of positions. The later chapters discuss science and particular expressions of reli- Intelligent Design, the critical study of gion. Thus an exploration of the relation Genesis and modern psychological foun- between the Wesleyan tradition and sci- dations for Wesley’s use of small groups. ence has the potential to raise a number What links these chapters is the context of important questions, especially in the of the authors, each writing from an aca- American context where the relation demic base within the broad Wesleyan or between Methodist theology and the Pen- Holiness tradition. Little here is original, tecostal and Holiness movements although Rebecca Flietstra’s attempt to remains close. The present volume has draw positive theological lessons from its origins in a joint Conference between natural selection is a worthy attempt by the Wesleyan Theological Society and the a teacher of biology. Robert Branson’s Society for Pentecostal Studies: ‘Sighs, chapter on science and archaeology could Signs, and Significance: Pentecostal and have discussed the specifically Wesleyan Wesleyan Explorations of Science and context to good effect, but spends too Creation’. much space rehearsing the well known general history. Unfortunately the two societies chose John Wesley has been called ‘the great to publish separate volumes from the cannibaliser’: perfectly willing to edit conference. The volume under review Cranmer’s Book of Common Prayer in reprints a characteristically insightful order to reflect his own theology. Each of address from Jürgen Moltmann on the the early chapters of this book discusses Pentecostal aspects of the conference Wesley’s Survey of the Wisdom of God in theme, exploring their relation to Creation. This is a little known compila- Eucharist and Incarnation. Moltmann’s tion which Wesley produced and chapter, however, is stranded in the expanded in the last years of his life, midst of a set of disparate contributions drawing on well known, and more which fail to present a coherent obscure, eighteenth century scientific approach. Links could have been drawn writing; part of Wesley’s project to ensure with Wesleyan theology. The rediscovery that his preachers had the opportunity of of the past, present and future aspects of a good general education. These chapters the Eucharist upon which Moltmann open a window into Wesley’s perspective draws is largely due to the work of the as an interested and well read teacher. Methodist theologian Geoffrey Wain- They would, however, have benefited wright; Moltmann’s optimistic conclu- from greater editorial rigour, both to sions for the future of the finite in the remove duplication and also to highlight light of the incarnation chime well with the significant differences between Gordon Rupp’s pithy summary of Laura Felleman’s reading of the Survey Methodist theology as ‘the optimism of as an almost neutral attempt to allow grace’. But none of that is worked out Wesley’s readers to understand and glory here. in the wonders of Creation, and Otto and

192 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews

Lodahl’s reading which sees the work as coincided with the start of the process of more explicitly combative, seeking to undoing the submergence of the literal refute atheism. Felleman’s reading is interpretation of Scripture beneath the surely correct as she can demonstrate allegorical or spiritual interpretation. Wesley’s removal of the more controver- One impact of these two events was sial passages from his sources. Felleman that questions arose about Noah’s Ark: highlights the fact that eighteenth cen- How could the animals of the Americas tury science was not simply natural the- reach the Near East? Was there room in ology, straightforwardly in the service of the Ark even if they could, by some mira- apologetics, but that Wesley, for one, took cle, make the journey? And it has become care that the education of his preachers a lot worse as the centuries have passed should be both rounded and nuanced. since then: the chasm between Scrip- This, at least, is a lesson from the eigh- ture’s account of the natural world and teenth century that we could well relearn what we have found out about it just today. keeps growing. An aside: was the Holy Philip Luscombe is Principal of Wes- Spirit’s intention in breathing out Scrip- ley House, Cambridge, and teaches ture to tell us about the natural world within the Cambridge Theological (things we can discover for ourselves) or Federation. to tell us about God (things we cannot know unless God tells us)? Scripture cer- tainly encourages us to discern certain Olaf Pedersen characteristics of God from the created The Two Books: Historical Notes on order, but it also tells us there are dis- Some Interactions Between Natural tinct limits to what the world can tell us Science and Theology about God’s power and eternal nature. Vatican City: Vatican Observatory The problem is not restricted to Dar- Foundation, 2007. 448 pp. pb. £18.50. win’s theory, but includes the whole vast ISBN-13 978-8820979010 ancient cosmos. What to do about it? What For many years, this book was only avail- to think about it? Do the two books tell the able in Danish and Polish. Wonderfully it same story? Should we expect them to? has now appeared posthumously in a And is the idea that nature can be treated more widely read language. It is based on as a book a valid one anyway? (Just some lectures the author gave in Den- because an idea is an old one, doesn’t mark and in Cambridge in the 1980s. It make it right). is a book on a topic that I have long This is where Pedersen’s book is so desired to see written about: the relation- helpful. He explores how people have ship between Scripture and the natural thought about the relationship between world. Scripture has much to say about Scripture and nature since this metaphor the natural order and what it can (and arose during the time of the Church cannot) tell us about its creator (e.g. Ps. Fathers (and particularly Augustine). He 19: 1-6; Isa. 40: 26; 45: 18; Matt. 6: 28-30; starts with the ancient Greek philoso- John 12: 24; and supremely Rom. 1: 19- phers such as Archimedes, Plato and 20). But for much of the Christian era, a Aristotle as they provided much of the non-scriptural metaphor was dominant cultural background against which the whereby the natural world was compared New Testament was written. They also to a book, God’s other book in fact. There gave new technical and philosophical were few problems with this metaphor meanings to everyday Greek words, some until about 500 years ago when Euro- of which appear in the New Testament peans started exploring the world by sea with their technical rather than their and discovered lands that they had not everyday sense. Pedersen’s discussion of even suspected existed. This roughly the first chapter of John is particularly

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 193 Book Reviews helpful on this point. (writing in 1833) concerning Natural Theology: He discusses how the fourfold interpre- tation of Scripture arose (which can be ‘What shall I do to be saved?’ is not simplified to ‘literal’ and spiritual’). He answered by Natural Theology, but sets out how theologians interacted with only by the doctrines of the Gospel. Greek philosophy and astrology. He out- The restoration of sinners to accept- lines what happened in the flowering of ance and favour with a God of justice intellectual life in the church in the thir- cannot be achieved by all the teenth century in both France and resources and expedients of natural Britain under the impact of contacts with theology… which makes known to us Muslim Spain, particularly the question our sin, but cannot make known to us as to whether there any limits on God’s our salvation. Nevertheless, however power. One unintended consequence of little natural theology can be trusted this discussion was the overturning of as an informer, yet as an enquirer, or the old saying ‘Nature abhors a vacuum’. rather as a prompter to enquiry, it is For one proposition that was condemned of inestimable value. by a bishop of Paris in the thirteenth cen- tury was the notion that God could not Stephen Walley is a research associate move the cosmos if he chose to. Since the at the Cavendish Laboratory, Univer- bishop was unwilling to countenance any sity of Cambridge. limits on God’s power at all, then if he chose to move the universe, a vacuum Tatha Wiley would necessarily be left behind Creation and the Conflict over (although it was several centuries before vacuums were created experimentally). Evolution Cambridge: James Clarke, 2009. 164 pp. Although it is a large book (424 pages, pb. £19.50. ISBN-13 978-0-227-17282-7 including an extensive bibliography) printed in a large font size, with helpfully The author, a Roman Catholic academic, wide margins for making notes, many of sets the scene in the first chapter for the the discussions are in fact quite brief. ones to follow, by sketching out the proce- Pedersen only ever intended these to be dures of ‘modern critical scholarship’ of notes. Thus often I was only able to read the Bible with special reference to the a few pages at a time, having to stop and concept of creation. let the information sink in. And at times A lucid and succinct account of the I was blown away with the profundity of development of the Judaeo-Christian what he had said. He takes the discus- doctrine of creation follows. Its readabil- sion as far as the nineteenth century ity and economy of words is warming. It with the rise of modern geology and evo- distinguishes clearly between the theo- lutionary biology (these are linked logical concept of creation and scientific through a new historical understanding accounts of origins in a big bang, touch- of the Earth that arose at the end of the ing on the category difference between eighteenth century). So he does not dis- the two and also between creation and cuss the impact in the twentieth century (organic) evolution. But, as the author of the discovery of how vast and ancient pithily remarks, ‘It is one thing to say the universe is. Ironically many (though what a Christian doctrine is or what its not all) Christians have accepted the development has been, and another to more recent discoveries in astronomy but say what Christians themselves know of reject the former discoveries in geology it’ (52). She summarises nine all-too- and biology. familiar examples of students’ doctrinal I will finish with one very helpful quo- perceptions in a piece of litotes – ‘the tation Pedersen gives from Chalmers understanding of doctrines is a bit tenu-

194 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews ous’ – while bemoaning that ‘their under- fundamentalism’, many of which are standing of science is even more prob- valid; and what follows particularly lematic’ (52). reflects the American scene. The term ‘fundamentalism’, however, is not as The third chapter gets down to dis- monolithic as seems to be implied. Its cussing the antiquity of the idea of evolu- meaning has changed from that which tion and the birth and growth of Darwin’s underpins the writing of The Fundamen- theory about the mechanisms of adapta- tals to being almost a theological swear- tion and the origin of species. Paley, word equated with an undiscerning liter- Mendel, Dobzhansky, Crick, Watson alism – which, sadly, it often is. I don’t (DNA structure – 1953, not 1943 as on p. think it is correct to generalise by saying 66), Ayala et al. are in the procession and of The Fundamentals that ‘Sharing first halfway through the chapter the verdict place for rejection… [was] Charles Dar- is reached that ‘Darwin’s methodological win’s theory of evolution.’ (103) Ronald principle rejects neither God nor cre- Numbers, in his magisterial work The ation.’ (59) The rest of the chapter is Creationists, points out that ‘The essays devoted to philosophical matters about in The Fundamentals, roughly one fifth the nature of science and its ‘method’ – of which touched on the issue of evolu- though I would rather have had ‘scien- tion, covered the entire spectrum of evan- tific methods’ in the plural as the sub- gelical opinion…’ (2nd edn., p. 53). I also heading, and again elsewhere. The want to distance myself from the claim of nature of the difference between a scien- this and some other authors (Forrest is tific hypothesis and a ‘theory’ is clarified, cited, but there are others) ‘that Intelli- as it needs to be in view of common dis- gent Design is creationism under a new missive comments like ‘evolution is just a name. I [Wiley] take this view here, too.’ theory’. A final section on science and [98 footnote] But two different sets of faith concludes the chapter and leads arguments are involved in young-Earth into an inspection of Roman Catholic creationism and Intelligent Design. Cre- responses to evolutionary theory. ationism, from about the 1980s, in popu- There follows a lengthy chapter which lar understanding has come to mean returns to the key difference between the young-Earth creationism [Numbers op. timeless act of creation as a theological cit. 329] with a consequent rejection of concept and the physical origins of mat- evolution. It accepts the traditional belief ter and life. Confusion between the two in divine creation, but adds belief in a has spawned so much unnecessary ten- geologically young Earth. The Intelligent sion about the big bang and Darwin’s Design Movement, developed in the theory. To portray evolution and creation 1990s, uses a different line of argument, as alternatives not only commits a cate- one for design and by implication an gory mistake but creates an imaginary intelligent designer. Wiley correctly iden- opponent for would-be ‘shadow-boxers’. tifies their strategy as exemplifying an Professor Kenneth R. Miller, on the back ancient philosophical ‘chestnut’ – the cover, encapsulates the author’s distinc- ‘God-of-the-gaps’. The confusion leaves tive contribution by saying, ‘The scien- traditional arguments for design unaf- tific failures of Intelligent Design and fected but it does muddy the waters. This other forms of creationism have been penultimate chapter ends with a useful detailed in dozens of books, scores of arti- collection of extracts from major court cles, and in a handful of spectacular court proceedings and legal rulings in the US cases. What Tatha Wiley adds to this mix and concludes with the perceptive obser- is a provocative and highly readable vation that, even among those who do not analysis of the theological failings of favour the YEC/ID positions, ‘Whatever today’s creationist movement.’ The chap- debate takes place on the issue is formu- ter begins with ‘some strong criticisms of lated in creationists’ terms’ (128).

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 195 Book Reviews

The author, in summarising her main potentially relevant references and ideas points under the final chapter heading and gives an example (but not necessar- Fundamentalist Anxiety, briefly ily a good model) of how one might pro- addresses the concept of truth. It would ceed in exploring this issue. need a longer book to unpack this key My understanding of the basic argu- concept but I would like to have seen it ment of the book is the following. Life is tackled in more detail. An earlier point emergent, that is, the sum is greater than (40) is reinforced, namely Augustine’s the parts. Furthermore, it can be viewed belief that ‘original sin’ passes to all and interpreted from a hierarchy of lev- humankind through biological inheri- els: physical, biological, psychological and tance, which leads her to conclude that cultural. Objects at each level cannot be ‘the fundamentalist concern is with orig- simply reduced to their lower level com- inal sin rather than with creation’ in pro- ponents. Systems theory provides a pos- moting ‘their attempts to eliminate evo- sible methodology to characterise the lution in science programs’ (137). components of each level, their interac- An extensive bibliography is provided, tion with each other, and with con- but I would also have appreciated an straints. Graves claims that the ‘soul’ is index. something that operates at the psycho- logical and cultural level. It is charac- Michael Poole is Visiting Research Fel- terised as ‘a systems constellation of con- low in Science and Religion in the stitutive relationships regardless of Department of Education and Profes- emergent level’ (206). sional Studies, King’s College London. For me some of the weaknesses of the book overpower it. I struggle to see how Mark Graves passages such as the following provide Mind, Brain and the Elusive Soul: new or helpful insights: ‘In an emergent Human Systems of Cognitive Science interpretation, Jesus would typify the and Religion transcendent-level systems of spirit as Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008. 244 pp. hb. best grounded in human physical, biolog- £55.00. ISBN 978-0-7546-6266-6 ical, and psychological-level systems and as constructed through the cultural-level This book is a very ambitious multi-disci- systems of first-century Palestine.’ (146) plinary undertaking. It draws on fields as Does this provide new insights compared diverse and specialised as pragmatic phi- to the ‘classical’ interpretation? Does this losophy, Irenaean theology, quantum make the doctrine of the Incarnation physics, information theory, cybernetics, clearer, or more obtuse? psychology, neuroscience and molecular biophysics. Furthermore, defining the Sin is interpreted in terms of the writ- ‘human soul’ and justifying its existence ings of the psychiatrist Gerald May and in a scientific framework is going to be the Catholic mystic Thomas Merton, both fraught with significant challenges. of which are heavily influenced by Bud- dhism. This leads to statements such as The goal is to address the question, ‘decisions affect one’s “natural” self, but ‘How do contemporary investigations in through a willingness to participate in cognitive and brain science, pragmatic transcendent-level systems, one connects philosophy and emergent systems theory one’s self to spiritual systems historically impact upon a theological understanding considered “supernatural”’ (207). of soul and spirit?’ (207). Unfortunately, I do not think the author has succeeded in Although the book claims to be con- breaking new ground and may have even cerned with how science impacts ‘a theo- muddied the waters. At least, he has logical understanding of soul and spirit,’ delineated some of the issues, given some I found there is little theology in the

196 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews book. Theology is largely reduced to thing’ that is ‘going to change the world’. anthropology. The review of theological It is promoted by people such as Ervin perspectives on the soul is brief and lim- Laszlo who do not hold regular academic ited. (I actually found the Wikipedia positions and try to argue for highly spec- entry more helpful). There is no engage- ulative positions that are well outside the ment with leading Protestant thinkers scientific mainstream. To me, Laszlo’s such as Luther, Calvin and Barth. Nei- writings are just scientific gobbledygook. ther, is there exploration of relevant bib- I was not convinced Graves has really lical texts or biblical scholarship. I would adopted an ‘emergentist approach’ to the- have liked discussion of texts such as ological questions. Alister McGrath and I Matthew 22:37-38 and 1 Thessalonians have written separately how a key aspect 5:23 which explicitly discuss the soul. A to such an approach is to acknowledge key issue is whether the biblical texts two related points. First, ontology deter- endorse the partition of a person into mines epistemology. Second, theology is a mind, body and soul. legitimate discipline in its own right. It I would have found it helpful if Graves involves objects, concepts, categories, and had clearly stated his theological com- methods that are distinct from those in mitments. It appears to be a liberal other disciplines. It cannot be reduced to Catholic position, which appears to deny psychology or anthropology. the ‘super-natural’. To what extent did There are a number of basic technical his pre-suppositions and prior commit- errors in the book. For example, the fol- ments determine his conclusions? I am lowing statements are incorrect: ‘hemo- curious whether he considers basic ques- globin does not contain iron’ (14), ‘Scien- tions such as the following meaningful: tists, using galaxies as gravitational did the historical person Jesus Christ lenses, have demonstrated quantum rise from the dead? Was Jesus’ death a entanglement among particles that at substitutionary atonement for the sin of one time were separated over a hundred mankind? thousand light years’ (84) and ‘the pat- Here is a possible way of considering tern of protons striking the retina’ (108). how the author’s approach might be Graves overstates the case in the fol- received. If a reader is familiar with sys- lowing claims, with which most of my tems theory and considers it a legitimate theoretical physicists colleagues would and valuable academic discipline then disagree. ‘Quantum mechanical phenom- this book may provide a way to under- ena, such as non-locality, challenge phys- stand better the notion of a soul and spir- ical reductionism.’ (65); ‘In the twentieth ituality. However, a more stringent test of century, physicists discovered that the the significance of this work is the ques- physical universe was in constant flux. tion, ‘for those not familiar with systems Some physicists began looking to Eastern theory is it worth learning it in order to philosophies for a replacement for crum- gain new insights into theology?’ My bling Western metaphysics…’ (38). answer is no. I would have hoped for a higher stan- To me, cognitive science is a legitimate dard from a book in the Ashgate Science and exciting enterprise involving multi- and Religion series. In particular, I would ple academic disciplines. It is populated hope for both a greater depth and by many leading researchers from a breadth of scholarship. range of disciplines and has made impor- tant contributions to our understanding Ross McKenzie is a Professor of of how the brain works and functions Physics at the University of Queens- (and does not function at times). However, land in Brisbane, Australia, and writes in distinct contrast, ‘emergent systems on science and theology at www. theory’ claims to be a ‘theory of every- revelation4-11.blogspot.com

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 197 Book Reviews

Benjamin Wiker and Jonathan and third, that the chemistry has been so Witt arranged as to act as a tutor, revealing its A Meaningful World: How the Arts and secrets step by step so as to lead human Sciences Reveal the Genius of Nature investigators deeper and deeper into Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, truth. 2006. 257 pp. pb. $18.00. ISBN 0 -8308- This claim is taken further in their 2799-4 chapter entitled ‘A Cosmic Home This is a disappointing book on an impor- Designed for Discovery’, in which after tant theme. Its authors are both linked summarising some of the fine tuning of with the Discovery Institute in Seattle, the laws and constants of physics neces- and while both have written on scientific sary for life, they paraphrase the argu- themes, their academic training is in ments of The Privileged Planet by Gon- ethics and literature respectively. The zalez and Richards, claiming not only target of their polemic is materialist that the earth is remarkably, perhaps reductionism, represented, for example, uniquely, suited for life, but that it is also by the writings of Richard Dawkins, or by uniquely fitted for the process of human the statement of Steven Weinberg in his discovery. They conclude their main book on cosmology The First Three Min- argument with a section on biology, utes that ‘The more the universe seems which briefly rehearses arguments pre- comprehensible, the more it seems point- sented elsewhere (for example by less.’ Their aim is to show that the uni- Michael Behe and William Dembski) in verse is in fact full of meaning, and that favour of intelligent input into biological to reduce it, as in their view Darwinism mechanisms, but focuses more on an does, to nothing more than random attack on biological reductionism, in the motions of atoms governed by chance and sense of describing and analysing organ- necessity, is both scientifically and philo- isms in terms of parts and functions, sophically mistaken. instead of describing them as individuals or classifying them as species; they claim Their method is to consider the quality (if I understand them correctly) that this which they call genius, the work of a sort of reductionism takes away mean- great and original mind; they attempt to ing. There is substantial critical refer- show what genius is, and how it can be ence in this section on biology to post- recognised, and to demonstrate that the modernism, deconstruction, and the writ- natural world, and especially the biologi- ings of Jacques Derrida. cal world, demonstrates such genius. So they consider first the plays of Shake- It will be clear that this publication is speare, represented by Hamlet and the part of the output of the Intelligent Tempest, secondly mathematics, repre- Design movement; in my judgement it is sented by Euclid’s geometry, and in par- the least satisfactory of any of the books ticular his proof of the theorem of from this school that I have read. For Pythagoras, before looking at the history authors with a background in philosophy of chemistry, culminating in the under- and literature, the style of writing is standing of the nature and properties of astonishingly bad; their knowledge of sci- the elements, as represented by entific matters seems second-hand, and Mendeleev’s Periodic Table. Their claim it is alarming for example that a book at this point is first, that the discovery that makes one of its main subjects the and elucidation of the periodic table is elements of the periodic table should con- evidence of human genius, an intellectual sistently misspell ‘phophorus’. I won- quality not explicable by Darwinian dered whether there has been any seri- means; second, that the table itself ous attempt at proof reading and editing, demonstrates a quality of genius in and I feel that in its present form it dam- nature which points to a cosmic designer; ages the reputation of IVP academic. I

198 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews am astonished that it receives such (19). Interestingly enough, Sternberg’s remarkable commendation from other case is not a compatibilist position; a the- authors in the Intelligent Design tradi- ory that seeks to show how physical tion; for Guillermo Gonzalez to write that determination and human freedom are ‘I am not exaggerating too much to say compatible. He differs from compatibil- that this book is in the same class as the ism because compatibilism defines free- works of genius its authors describe’ is in dom as ‘having alternate choices avail- my judgement ridiculous. This is a able’ and he defines it as ‘the extent to tragedy, for most of the readers of this which my mind controls my actions, journal will agree with the main conclu- regardless of what choices happen to be sion of the book, that the universe is full available’ (41). He asks the pertinent of meaning and purpose, and that science question: ‘Do I control my decisions or properly understood confirms rather does my brain?’ (23). Is what the brain than challenges that verdict. It is an does sufficient or insufficient to deter- argument that deserves to be better mine any given act? made – and has been, for example by Biological determinism, upheld by Alister McGrath (The Re-enchantment of many scientists and philosophers – Nature – Science, Religion and the including Francis Crick, Joseph LeDoux, Human Sense of Wonder; London, Hod- Mark Hallett, Richard Rorty, Pierre der and Stoughton, 2002). Laplace, and Paul and Patricia Church- Paul Wraight has retired from teach- land – is growing the further we under- ing physics and electronics at stand the physical processes of the brain. Aberdeen University and is pursuing It has ‘been fruitful in science,’ according among other interests the relevance of to Sternberg, since it ‘provides a basis for cosmology to Christian belief. projectile motion, collisions, elasticity, and movements of planets’ (29). This basis would not be there if the world Eliezer Sternberg behaved randomly on a macroscopic My Brain Made Me Do It: The Rise of level, since there would be no way to have Neuroscience and the Threat to Moral controlled measurements or provide reli- Responsibility able predictions. Science simply cannot Amherst: N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2010. function without some sense of determin- 244 pp. pb. £10.99. ISBN-13 978- ism; the extent to which people, brains, 1616141653 and other physical objects are deter- mined is the central question. The ran- A recent graduate of Brandeis, who domness of quantum events, discovered majored in neuroscience and philosophy, by Copenhagen and Bohr, cannot and has produced a book that reads as if an should not be used to argue for human experienced professor wrote it. Although responsibility since ‘we also cannot be his beginning is like John Calvin – writ- held accountable for our actions if they ing a book at an early age – he argues in are caused by random events’ (34). We opposition to Calvin by calling for a would have to discover something more moral responsibility in light of human than quantum indeterminateness and freedom. This freedom shows up in the randomness to show humans are morally fact that ‘the agent can navigate his accountable. inner world of experience in any way he chooses,’ and this is what ‘distinguishes So what justifies belief in human free- us from machines and from animals’ dom and moral responsibility? For Stern- (198). Sternberg’s argument is that berg, freedom lies in ‘the ability of a per- ‘though the threat of neuroscience to free son’s conscious self to control his or her will and moral responsibility is strong, thoughts and actions’ (36), and the justi- there is a way they can be reconciled’ fication may lie in our common-sense

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 199 Book Reviews experience of controlling our actions and answer this question. It might be what thoughts. I may decide to pick up a pen he would call a boundless question; one on the ground or I may not. But, as many that is extremely hard to disentangle, eliminative materialists say, common identify and locate. He ends his work on sense and folk understandings of free- a positive note saying that we [those in dom do not justify belief in free will. neuroscience] ‘are up to the task’ (199). I Sternberg argues that certain deep, trou- would agree with him in so far as neuro- bling moral considerations – like Jean science is rapidly growing and may some- Valjean’s torment over whether to turn day provide a suitable answer that can be himself in or not – ‘suggests to us that he agreed upon. But this may be impossible has freedom of the will’ (47). This is as well. Arthur Schopenhauer rightly related to the notion of moral introspec- called this issue (the mind-brain prob- tion, conscious deliberation, and lament, lem) the ‘world-knot’ (Weltknoten) and it whereby an agent freely chooses between is obvious just how tight this knot is tied. options, even where there are no rules to Sternberg does a great job in clarifying go by (only existential concerns). and analysing this knot. His usage of life Sternberg goes on to analyse two popu- examples and metaphors allows the lar theories of mind: dualism and emer- reader to follow his train of thought eas- gence.For Sternberg dualism ‘doesn’t ily. He may need to further his approach hold water as a theory’ and emergence by attempting a constructive argument ‘doesn’t help the case for free will and for how neuronal activity and human moral responsibility’ because ‘an emer- freedom relate, but for what it is worth, gent property may be more than the sum Sternberg does a great job. of its parts, but it is still determined by Kile Jones is a PhD student at Clare- its parts’ (49). So how can one escape mont School of Theology and holds a these two positions? Modern findings in Masters of Theological Studies neuroscience indicate the level to which (M.T.S.) and a Masters of Sacred The- the brain determines behaviour: just ology (S.T.M.) from Boston University. think of Tourette’s syndrome, Parkinson’s disease, Huntington’s chorea, alien hand syndrome, obsessive compulsive disorder Fraser Watts & Kevin Dutton (eds.) (OCD), forced hyperphasia, and schizo- Why the Science and Religion phrenia as examples. Many neuroscien- Dialogue Matters: Voices from the tists have used these as evidence for the International Society for Science and direct correlation between brain and bod- Religion ily behaviour. They speak of ‘executive Philadelphia & London: Templeton functioning’ instead of ‘free will’. The Foundation Press, 2006. 158pp. pb. executive functioning, they say, is located $19.95. ISBN 13: 978-1-59947-103-7 & in the frontal lobe; the area where the 10: 1-59947-103-5 brain ‘coordinates actions that reflect the knowledge and goals stored in memory’ The title for this collection of essays, (63). For Sternberg, ‘there is no doubt emerging from contributors across the that, without a healthy brain, we would continents and the major religious tradi- not have free will. That doesn’t mean tions, is well chosen. No impartial reader that free will is equivalent to the opera- could come away from this book with an tion of the frontal lobe – only that it indifferent attitude to the science and depends on it’ (64). So if freedom is not religion dialogue. In the context of the located in some immaterial, irreducible ecological crisis (to which the use of tech- substance or soul, or as an emergent nology has contributed), and a socially property, where is it located? and politically fragmented world order (in which religion is entangled), the As far as I can tell Sternberg does not stakes are high and the conversation

200 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews matters. The false hubris capable of unhealthy religion (59) while recognising being exhibited equally by science and that the world religions do not constitute religion needs tempering through the a monolithic whole; indeed they are ‘not engagement of the one with the other (4). even the same kind of thing’ (57). For him, an unhealthy religion is defined by being As John Polkinghorne rightly observes, socially separatist and intellectually science succeeds by the narrowness of its closed. Engagement with science not only ambitions (27). It concerns itself, almost offers a route of escape from these con- entirely, with the general and the repeat- finements, but, in science, religions may able. Yet, as George Ellis affirms, the find a model of the search for truth that is things that are of highest value in human intrinsically open to new insight. If reli- life are the unique and unrepeatable (18). gion is genuinely concerned with the An inevitable danger of the (methodologi- ground of all reality then it cannot ignore cally) reductionist stance of science is the the insights that science offers from promotion of a distasteful, dehumanising within its realm of competence (44 cf. 69). view of humanity (4 cf. 56). ‘It is an extraordinary phenomenon’, observes A particular concern of this volume, Ellis, ‘people from sociology, psychology, stemming from the impetus behind the evolutionary theory, molecular biology, formation of the International Society for neuroscience, philosophy, and so on, mak- Science and Religion, is that each reli- ing claims that humans are far less than gious tradition has potentially something they actually are.’ (8). The religious per- to learn from how other religious voices spective on human identity offers a van- have faced the common question of the tage point from which to challenge such appropriate mode of engagement with conclusions. It is in any case unclear why the claims of science (137). This is seen as one should listen to someone who is con- an important expansion of the debate vinced that consciousness is but an over against the engagement of Western epiphenomenon (a mere appearance) Christianity with science which has when, on their own account, such a view tended to dominate. Accordingly, half this is not the product of ‘rational cognition by volume of essays is given over to contrib- a conscious and critical mind’ (10). utors outside the Western Christian tra- dition who view the debate from their Many contributors to this volume own religious stance. Thus we hear Jew- (among them Ellis, Polkinghorne, Rolston ish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist and Asian and Watts) point out that science per se is Christian voices wrestling honestly with incapable of addressing ethical questions the peculiarities of their context. This is concerning an appropriate hierarchy of not a question of forcing a pluralist values by virtue of its restricted focus. agenda – though there is a diversity of Additionally, as Watts rightly asserts, sci- approach here, compare Polkinghorne ence’s methodological specificity cannot (49) with Kim (125f.) – but rather of immunise it against the influence of cul- enabling genuine dialogue. ture (54-57) in both the choice of what sci- ence gets done and in the background These essays will be of interest both to assumptions utilised in its models of the seasoned observers of the science and world. Thus science is embroiled in the religion debate, wishing to broaden the business of values even as it eschews range of perspectives open to them, as questions of value. Without the kind of well as the person who is new to this area critical orientation that religion can offer and seeking an orientating map. The science is dangerously blind. essays are, without exception, commend- ably succinct, lucid and engaged. They A genuine dialogue is, of course, a two will reward the reader’s attention. way process. Religion too has much to gain from science. Watts introduces the Jeremy Law is Dean of Chapel at Can- distinction between healthy and terbury Christ Church University.

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 201 Book Reviews

Celia Deane-Drummond the majority of the rest of the book. Eco-Theology Chapter seven acts as an archway into London: Darton, Longman and Todd, the second half of Eco-Theology by con- 2008. 240 pp. pb. £19.95. ISBN 0-232- sidering the strengths and weaknesses of 52616-8 biblical eco-theology. The final five chap- In writing Eco-Theology, Celia Deane- ters develop environmental theologies of Drummond has produced an authorita- Christology, theodicy, Spirit, eschatology tive textbook for this important area of and eco-feminist theology. Each of these theology. This makes it essential reading chapters is well focused and each would for all those who are interested in envi- stand alone as elegant essays on these ronmental theology and it will almost important themes. The first chapter on certainly become the standard textbook Christology uncovers a paradox that an in the field for the foreseeable future. emphasis on the historical (earthly) Jesus can lead to a neglect of the envi- The book begins with two introductory ronmental dimension of the Cosmic chapters. The first provides an introduc- Christ as set out for example in the hymn tion to the key environmental problems in Colossians 1. This idea is developed (human population, resources use, pollu- and a more cosmic understanding of the tion, climate change and biodiversity incarnation is explored, drawing on John loss). The second considers the social 1 and the concept of Christ as incarnate issues of economic and environmental wisdom. In the chapter on theodicy the justice. These give a helpful context for author considers the suffering of animals the later chapters on theology. The next as well as some of the classic and modern four chapters explore eco-theology from responses to evil, including the work of the four geographic points of the globe. experts such as Marilyn McCord Adams The view from the South gives an excel- and Keith Ward. Deane-Drummond lent introduction to the emerging syn- develops her own concept of a shadow ergy between environmental concerns Sophia based on a Christological and the theologies of South American approach. This develops her work on and African theologians, with an empha- John 1 in the previous chapter. The chap- sis on liberation and justice. Likewise the ter on eco-feminist theology gives a good chapter on the East provides a valuable overview of this popular area. The author overview of Eastern Orthodox convincingly develops a wisdom strand approaches, whose tradition gives a cen- within this area, providing a coherent tral place for creation in theology. The theology across these different sub disci- chapter on the North considers environ- plines. Ecology and Spirit and eco-escha- mental ethics and looks at the classic sec- tology both draw heavily on the ideas of ular approaches of Aldo Leopold and Moltmann and propose an ultimate Arne Naess. Though not all would con- redemption of nature, which will set cre- sider these strictly eco-theology, their ation free. inclusion is extremely useful in an overview book of this nature. This chap- The book ends with a postscript on ter also explores creation spirituality, praxis and some study questions. These considering views as wide ranging as serve to remind us that much of the pur- Teilhard de Chardin, Matthew Fox and pose of environmental theology is to pro- Thomas Berry. The chapter on the West vide a basis for change and action. Over- focuses on genetically modified crops, all this is a landmark book and an out- considering them from the perspective of standing achievement. It is inclusive of a social ecology. This did not quite seem to very broad range of approaches, while fit the chapter title but is informative still steering a distinctive path through and provides more context for Western them. Deane-Drummond has drawn sen- environmental theology, which makes up sitively from non-Christian traditions

202 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews while providing a deeply Christian theo- shed on the virgin birth? Did Adam and logical foundation. Eve exist? What role do genes play in governing our behaviour? Do you Margot Hodson is Vicar of Haddenham approve of the use of human embryos for Benefice in Buckinghamshire and for- research? Thus the questions and mer Chaplain of Jesus College, Oxford. answers span a broad range of topics She is a Director of the John Ray Ini- relating to science and the Christian tiative and teaches Environmental faith. On the whole the scientists inter- Ethics at Oxford Brookes University. viewed give good, succinct answers, though inevitably there is some repeti- Nigel Bovey tion of material in the responses as there God, the big bang and Bunsen-burning are common views on some topics. issues The final chapter is a summary of the Milton Keynes: Authentic Media, 2008. interviews, with the author trying to pick xxi+204pp. pb. £8.99. ISBN-13: 978-1- out the common threads and key themes 85078-806-5 in the answers that the scientists have Based on a series of seventeen interviews provided to his questions. The key with well-known scientists, that were themes chosen are: creation; limitations originally published in the Salvation of science; faith; miracles; suffering; prov- Army magazine The War Cry, this book ing God; the Goldilocks effect; dark addresses the relation of science and energy; the moral law; written evidence; Christian faith at a level that is suitable eyewitness accounts; forensic evidence. I for the ordinary Christian (rather than found this chapter somewhat unsatisfac- those with a background in science). The tory in that the space devoted to each author, a journalist, is not a scientist and theme was very uneven and their choice has aimed to produce a book suitable for and arrangement did not seem to follow a a thinking layman and has to a large totally coherent pattern. extent succeeded. I would be happy to If I have a criticism of the book it is recommend this to Christians without a that it features only the ‘usual suspects’, scientific background, and even to those whose names will be familiar to readers not yet Christian who are interested in of Science and Christian Belief, and no how science and the Christian faith can women at all are represented. This lack be related. of women and younger scientists could Each chapter, except the last, is an give the impression that you will only be interview with a leading scientist who is interested in the issues raised if you are also a Christian. Chapters start with a older and male – this is unfortunate and, brief biography and end with a short ‘fact I think, a missed opportunity to broaden file’ that outlines the interviewee’s the appeal of the book and to show that career. In between, there is a series of Christians of all ages and both genders questions to, and answers from, the sci- are involved in science. entist. The questions range over general Overall, this book is a useful contribu- issues such as: How did you come to tion on the subject of science and Christ- faith? How did you get interested in sci- ian faith issues for the right audience ence? What is your current research? Do (non-scientists). However, it will probably you see a conflict between science and only have a short shelf life as science faith? Can science prove / disprove God? moves on and changes, so the book will Is it possible to believe in evolution and seem dated in a few years time. be a Christian? and so on. There are also some very specific questions asked of Meric Srokosz is an oceanographer at individual scientists, for example: What the National Oceanography Centre, light can an understanding of genetics Southampton, UK.

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 203 Book Reviews

John B. Cobb (ed.) philosophical subjects to do with evolu- Back to Darwin: a richer account of tionary theory or its history. evolution The book is an expansion and updating Grand Rapids, Michigan/Cambridge UK: of proceedings of a conference organised William B Eerdmans Publishing in 2004 by the Centre for Process Stud- Company, 2008. 450pp. pb. £23.99. ISBN ies, an organisation dedicated to the 978-0-08028-4837-6 exploration of the ideas of Alfred North Back to Darwin is a compilation of 23 Whitehead and it is around his ideas that chapters (and a single significant appen- much of the book revolves. Whitehead’s dix) penned by 15 authors and edited by influence is explained by the editor in the John Cobb. The central, unifying theme introduction to the first section as a is a critical discussion of the metaphysi- world-view that postulates that ‘materi- cal assumptions of neo-Darwinism and alistic and dualistic metaphysics’ is mis- the book brings aspects of history, theol- leading and proposes a replacement. This ogy and philosophy to bear on the idea proposal is that ‘energy’ is the most basic that evolutionary science and Christian unit (rather than matter) and that units belief can be harmonised. The book, of of energy are events rather than objects. This leads to a metaphysics of organic some 450 pages, is divided into four sec- events (which does not seem to be tions: explained satisfactorily) as part of an I. Background materials. This part energy flux: it becomes data for subse- deals with historical issues and quent events to act upon. As this section examines the origin of the transi- is key background to the book the follow- tion from ‘design’ to natural selec- ing passage is taken from it and quoted tion. in its entirety. II. To broaden and diversify evolu- Accordingly, instead of viewing the tionary theory. This part looks at units of physical reality as tiny lumps alternatives to neo-Darwinism of matter that act on one another only and some of the mechanisms in from without, we emphasize the evolution. advantages of understanding them as momentary happenings or energy III. The philosophical challenge to events, largely constituted by their neo-Darwinism. This part looks at relations with events in the past. key issues of neo-Darwinism and They are interrelated occurrences of its religious implications. energy rather than self-contained IV. Evolution and God. This part material atoms. Whereas the individ- expands on the question of how we ual entities posited by the meta- can affirm a role for God in a world physics underlying neo-Darwinism explained by science and includes theory are bits of matter affected only the enticingly headed chapter by physical forces, the energy events ‘What God does’. posited by process metaphysics are affected internally by their environ- Plus an appendix on ‘the metaphysics ments. (9). of consciousness and evolution’. From this the argument is developed This is a complex and intriguing book the idea that genes act in relation to their and most of the 23 chapters could easily environment and to one another (hence be the subject of a lengthy review for Sci- denying the idea of mutations being ran- ence and Christian Belief. The range of dom). The first part of this statement is topics is vast and while a few are self con- current to modern biology and indeed tained (and sometimes isolated from the ‘nature via nurture’ develops the inti- rest of the book) many of them address mate connection between genes and their

204 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews environment (Ridley, M. Nature via Nur- seem to have been updated. The trouble ture: Genes, experience and what makes is that a lot of water has passed under us human, Harper (2004)). the bridge since Whitehead first posited his theory of the universe. Modern What is then added to this is a kind of physics paints a picture of the universe network of relations that seems to rely on as being much stranger than it was per- some form of transmission of information ceived in the 1940s and within the nested between the different hierarchies. Now hierarchy of causal explanation the pro- this may fit in with the notion of quan- posals by Whitehead need much stronger tum entanglement or, at least, be consis- tent at the quantum level, but the ideas underpinning. Science, by its legitimate require some founding in how this causes methods, excludes purpose and seeks to a relationship with macromolecules tran- minimise subjectivity. It provides a pow- scribing information at the DNA level. erful, systematic way of describing how the universe works. To add levels of In seeking clarification I accessed the explanation in order to encompass pur- centre’s website http://www.ctr4process. pose takes the scientific method beyond org/ but the link to hear John Cobb’s lec- where it can justifiably be pushed. ture ‘Process theology: an introductory introduction’ was broken. For instance, take chapter 8 (‘Hydro- gen: humanity’s maker and breaker’ by The book, as stated, combines the writ- Reg Morrison) dedicated to the hydrogen ings from many authors and while a atom and the weakness of the hydrogen number profess Christian belief others bond. He describes how this is the key to do not and so contributions from Fran- many processes in the universe from cisco Ayala (who authors four chapters) nuclear fusion in stars to the way that sit alongside Lynn Margulis and Dorian DNA is able to be transcribed to the Sagan. Margulis, in particular, brings a power that turns the bacterial flagellum. hard and keen focus on the Gaia hypoth- Oddly, perhaps, the property of the bond esis. Here Lovelock’s ideas are extended, that makes water such an interesting but in a way that moves away from an compound only merits the penultimate evidence base towards a philosophy of paragraph. In the final paragraph, how- environmentalism and human extinc- ever, he suggests that hydrogen is the tion. I often had a sense of authors bring- ‘vital force’ or ‘spark of life’. Why? It ing particular theories to the book and seems to me that this is an assertion that then riding these hobby horses. is neither needed nor makes sense. If it At a conference, there would, no doubt, were true then the end of a life would be be some lively debate after a presenta- harder to describe. A dead body contains tion and the chapters presented here the same amount of hydrogen as a living would be greatly improved if there were body, but the processes have stopped. The some discussion about the ideas that editor also includes a note that this is were presented, but there is no sense of part of a larger essay describing how engagement with many of these issues hydrogen-related incidents will prove to and one wonders what the reaction was be the death knell for humanity caught to some of the more contentious claims. between the upcoming deficiency of Ideas come thick and fast. Questions hydrocarbon-based fuels and methane about the nature of God, whether God is fuelled global warming. part of nature, if God is the divine Pat- The blurb at the back of the book tern in evolution are all mentioned but claims that the discussions within pres- not examined. ent a holistic case for evolution that both Unlike neo-Darwinism the lens that theists and non-theists can accept. This Whitehead proposed to examine the uni- is probably too bold a claim. Hardened verse with seventy years ago does not materialists will not be convinced by the

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 205 Book Reviews philosophy and biblical literalists will Thus, in the first part of the book, Rus- baulk at the lack of any engagement with sell provides a rigorous discussion of Big the Bible. There is much to be drawn Bang cosmology and its relation to theol- from this book and, as a study book, it ogy, especially concerning the question of would yield fertile soil for discussion, but actual infinites of space and time in cur- it is patchy and would definitely need rent cosmological models in the context chapter by chapter scrutiny. of theology’s claim that the universe, not being itself absolute, is therefore limited Tom Hartman lectures on animal bio- and in some sense finite. The following diversity and microscopy at the Uni- exploration of the possibilities which the versity of Nottingham and is currently theory of transfinite numbers as devel- resurrecting the zoology museum. oped by Cantor offers here is enlighten- ing, though at times the reading becomes Robert John Russell quite technical. Cosmology : From Alpha to Omega The same can be said of part two of the Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2008. 344 book, a discussion of the possibility that pp. pb. £19.99. ISBN 978-0-8006-6273-8 God acts continuously at the quantum level (though, importantly, not necessar- This is an anthology of papers written ily at that level alone), especially in bio- over the last few decades by the physicist logical evolution at the level of genetic and theologian Robert John Russell, the mutations. This part also includes a founder of the Center for Theology and rather detailed survey of the positions of the Natural Sciences, partly re-edited several scholars in science and theology and arranged in such a way as to present concerning this disputed question, not a panoramic overview of the way in only as regards the issue of divine action which research in science & theology can in the realm of physics and biology, but inform our understanding of the begin- also its relationship to human free will. ning of the universe, its development, The author gives a frank appraisal of sci- and its end and eschatological fulfilment. entific and theological arguments on both The overall approach is that of a two-way sides and follows a ‘what if’ approach, interaction which seeks to avoid unilat- which in my view succeeds in presenting eral relationships (theology adapts to the a solid case that the notion of divine influence of science, but not vice-versa), action at the quantum level (or indeed a ‘picking and choosing’ (41) on the part of still deeper level yet to be discovered) theology, mutual isolation along the lines makes scientific and theological sense. of the ‘non-overlapping magisteria’ para- digm, or reductionistic philosophies. The final part then deals with the rela- Instead, deeper theological and scientific tionship between Christian eschatology understanding is aimed at through tak- and scientific predictions for the future of ing the data of both fields squarely on the universe. Indeed, one of the chief board in such a way that, where there is merits of this book is that it addresses apparent dissonance between the two, squarely an issue which is generally consonance at a deeper level is sought marked by a ‘surprising lack of engage- for. R. J. Russell follows as his guiding ment’ (302) even within the science-the- methodology in this endeavour Nancey ology community. Russell steers clear of Murphy’s idea of employing the concept all-too-easy non-literal, demythologised of Lakatosian research programmes in or merely presentist readings of eschatol- the encounter between science and theol- ogy, proposing instead once again a two- ogy: that is to say theology makes predic- way approach: science imposes con- tions about the characteristics of the straints on theological eschatology, which physical world, which are then explored must take scientific scenarios for the and pursued. future into account and cannot simply

206 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 Book Reviews ignore them. At the same time, the resur- Norman C. Nevin (ed.) rection of Jesus challenges the assump- Should Christians Embrace Evolution? tion that the only reasonable approach to Biblical and scientific responses the future consists in extrapolating the Nottingham: IVP, 2009. 192 pp. pb. laws of nature. Instead, the resurrection £9.99. ISBN 9781844744060 is understood as a ‘first instantiation of a new law of the new creation’ (24), so that I have been intrigued and horrified by ‘something radically new really hap- this book. It is not the sort of rational pened to the universe at Easter’ (289, exposition that one expects in a book author’s emphasis). The author provides published by IVP, particularly under an outline of a Lakatosian research pro- their main imprint as opposed to the gramme for a reconstructed eschatology, more venturesome Apollos. Rather, it is a identifying directions of scientific concerted and frenzied assault on research that hold promise for such a another book, that by Denis Alexander, rapprochement, especially in the fields of Creation or Evolution: Do we have to relativity theory and cosmology and their choose? (Monarch, 2008). Clearly Alexan- implications for our understanding of der’s book has touched a raw spot for the time. contributors to Nevin’s compilation. The authors seem to have raided their lockers In sum, this book contains resources of for all the anti-Alexander ammunition great value for scholars in science and that they could find, even though much – theology. The overall approach of ‘playing perhaps, even, all – of it has been the game fairly’ (12), by which is meant retrieved from ancient battles where his- daring a genuine encounter that takes tory shows that it caused more noise the inputs of both science and theology than damage. This desperation surprised seriously without falling into the traps of me. I have just come back from a meeting ‘creationism’, reductionism and two-lan- of scientists, ministers and conservative guage philosophies proves fruitful, and in theologians in the United States where, my view the author delivers on his prom- in a forum where doubts about evolution ise that such an approach leads to deeper might be expected to be widespread, understanding in both science and theol- Alexander’s book was widely lauded. ogy. The book is academic in style and by no means easy reading, and readers Alexander is described as having a without a scientific background will not ‘novel’ theology which ‘cannot be be able to follow some of the very intri- described as mainstream’, and failing to cate discussion, though large parts can address the significant theological ques- nevertheless be read by the general edu- tions that arise from embracing evolution cated reader with great profit. (13). All I can say is that the ideas pro- pounded by Alexander have been around Daniel Saudek has studied sociology, is for years; they may be faulty or con- working as a Latin teacher and study- tentious, but they are not ‘novel’. And the ing physics and theology at Innsbruck questions which he discusses in Creation (Austria), and is an independent or Evolution are precisely those taken up scholar in the field of science and the- in Should Christians Embrace Evolu- ology. tion? The hate figure for Nevin’s men is the ‘theistic evolutionist’. Alexander is revealed as the front man for this tribe, with geologist Davis Young and geneti- cist Francis Collins hiding behind him (58). He is portrayed as someone who has sold out to the enemy through bad sci-

Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2 • 207 Book Reviews ence and sloppy exegesis. The problem is rected again (without evidence) (113). that the theistic evolutionist demonised The fallacy that knowing the mechanism by Nevin et al. is made of straw. For behind a miracle discredits its miracu- example, what about the historicity of lous nature is repeated (112); Aristotle Adam? Contrary to Nevin, (‘The theology dealt with that one three centuries before of theistic evolution necessarily denies Christ. Nevin claims that there is no evi- any notion of a fall and curse…’ (213), dence that new genetic information can there is nothing in theistic evolution as arise (218). He will find the evidence in such that denies the existence of a his- any modern genetics textbook. Alexander toric Adam and a historic fall. Many the- is castigated for vagueness about God’s istic evolutionists do not accept that such immanence in creation. Aubrey Moore an individual ever existed, but nor do claimed that this was the great theologi- many reputable exegetes. Since Adam cal value of Darwinism as long ago as was the first man ‘in God’s image’, we are 1889. not talking about genetic descent or The Editors close their volume (there anatomical resemblance (although this is is no Index) with a clear conclusion, wrongly claimed) (21). It is entirely pos- ‘Should Christians embrace evolution? sible to suggest that Adam actually Our answer is an unequivocal “no”!’ I am existed in time and that God’s image con- afraid my conclusion is equally stark. In ferred on him ‘extended outwards to his words adapted from my favourite review contemporaries as well as to his off- (originally referring to a film starring spring, and his disobedience disinherited Elvis Presley), ‘This is not a book to read, both alike’. This quotation comes from even by mistake.’ Derek Kidner’s Tyndale commentary on Genesis, published over forty years ago. I was unpleasantly surprised by this The criticism (53 in Nevin) that this has book. IVP have a well-earned reputation no ontological basis is odd: How does one for publishing sound scholarship. One ontologise God’s image? Is it really a may not always agree with it, but their manifestation of the Pelagian heresy books provide a solid basis for debate. (51)? Should Christians Embrace Evolution? fails badly on this criterion. Evolution is also described as a Gnos- tic heresy (72f.), although elsewhere the R.J. Berry is Professor Emeritus of analogy of God’s ‘two books’ is quoted Genetics at University College London without demur. The ghostly horde of non- and a former President of Christians evolution-believing scientists is resur- in Science.

208 • Science & Christian Belief, Vol 22, No. 2