John Polkinghorne, Theology in the Context of Science (London: SPCK, 2008), xxii + 120 Pps., $12.99.
In this new book, Polkinghorne contends that despite their different schemas and working methods, theologians and scientists share a common goal – the search for truth. From his perspective, and based on his extensive and highly regarded work as both a scientist and a priest, he asks fundamental questions about both disciplines and considers what theology can learn from science. He proposes that scientific method can be fruitfully applied to theology, revealing a powerful way to frame contextual theological discourse. Polkinghorne applies this proposed approach to fundamental themes of theology, each of which has a distinct chapter within this title: contextual theology, the nature of discourse, questions about time, our understanding of personhood, consonance in relation to creation, providence and rationality, motivated belief, eschatology and understanding. In what follows, I shall highlight some salient points from the text.
Chapter one emphasizes that theology has always been done in certain context, and there is no escaping that reality. The second chapter details the changed manner of scientific discourse that have resulted from many developments within the twenty century, as well as the implications of these changes for theology which is done in the context of science. Therein, he argues for a bottom-up approach to doing theology, fundamentally based on experience, much like what one finds in modern-day, physics-dominated science. He advocates the employment of inference to the best explanation in both disciplines. The third chapter considers the issue of the true nature of time, noting that whereas science constrains what may be said of such matters, it does not determine the answers to such questions, and that it is perfectly legitimate to consult theology. It is in this third chapter that Polkinghorne asserts the dipolarity of God regarding his eternality and temporality, as well as inability of God (fundamentally) to know an as-of-yet unformed future exhaustively.
The fourth chapter highlights the possibility of a new, revised version of natural theology, one that might proffer insight, but not proof to the question of god. Chapter five turns three points of contact between science and theology: 1) creation, 2) providence, and 3) relationality. Therein, he asserts that the picture of a God who interacts within the open grain of nature has profound implications on traditional notions of God’s sovereignty (and hence providence), and he highlights how the relational God of many contemporary theologies is consonant with the Trinitarian nature of the Christian Godhead. The sixth chapter concludes by acknowledging the apparent clash between different world faith traditions, and notes that bottom-up reasoning may aid us in that dialogue. The seventh chapter addresses eschatology, and stipulates that theology promotes hope for the future, whereas straight science promotes only hopelessness (i.e. freeze or fry). A postscript emphasizes the notion that both science and theology can be benefitted by engagement with one another.
All in all, this tightly argued and lucid discussion draws insights from the interaction between these two important ways of searching for truth, and is a short attempt to see what a scientific contextual theology might look like. If this title is any indication as to its potential, I must say that a scientific contextual theology should be welcome by all twenty-first century believers. Highly recommended to theological students who have interests in the science and theology dialogue in particular, and interdisciplinary discussions in general.
Bradford McCall, Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA