Science in Christian Perspective


Book Reviews for June 1969

SCIENCE, SECULARIZATION AND GOD by Kenneth Cauthen. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1960. 237 pp.
THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN THEOLOGY AND PSYCHOLOGY edited by Peter Homans. University of Chicago, 1968. 295 pp. $7.95.
THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN THEOLOGY AND PSYCHOLOGY edited by Peter Homans. University of Chicago, 1968. 295 pp. $7.95.
ESCAPE FROM REASON and THE GOD WHO IS THERE by Francis A. Schaeffer. Intervarsity Press, Chicago 1968. 96 pp. 95 cents, and 191 pp. $2.50, respectively.
MECHANICAL MAN by Dean E. Wooldridge. McGraw-Hill, New York 1968. 212 pp. $8.95.
THE IDENTITY OF MAN by J. Bronowski. Natural History Press, Garden City, New York 1966. 107 pp. 950 Paperback.
RUNAWAY WORLD by Michael Green. InterVarsity Press, London 1968. 125 pp. 4s 6d. Paperback.
MAKER OF HEAVEN AND EARTH by Langdon Gilkey. Anchor Books, Doubleday, Garden City, New York 1965. 378 pp. $1.45. Paperback.
THE CHRISTIAN STAKE IN SCIENCE by Robert E. D. Clark. Moody Press, Chicago 1967. 160 pp. $3.50

SCIENCE, SECULARIZATION AND GOD by Kenneth Cauthen. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1960. 237 pp.

This book is a welcome contribution to academic pursuits in that it aims to speak to man's contemporary situation from a biblical perspective and from an appreciation of natural theology and metaphysical philosophy. Cauthen is trying "to investigate the relationship of a biblically grounded religion to the science dominated, secularized culture of our time in pursuit of the thesis that is possible to be both a serious Christian and intelligent modem."(p.14). A valid review will evaluate how well he has accomplished his task.

The book reveals a sensitive, agonizing mind which is trying to find grounds for purpose in the structure of the universe and from within biblical revelation. Having rejected revivalistic pietism, classical Protestant supernaturalism, ontological metaphysical Greek philosophical systematizing, and transcendent neo-orthodoxy, Cauthen reaches out from a naturalistic theism in terms of process philosophy and its idea of becoming. The scientific revolution has questioned Christianity's credibility; the process of secularization is questioning its relevance; historical criticism questions its essence. The author wishes to present Christianity as a moral, but not a necessary, option for modern man. There is a transparent honesty in his gropings, a precise and penetrating analysis of the current theological and philosophical situation, and an appreciation of the necessity of presuppositional methods of argumentation. Cauthen is calling for dialogue.

Dialogue for this reviewer is difficult at this point, for Canthen too easily dismisses the classical Protestant orthodoxy from within which the reviewer speaks. The important problems to which Cauthen speaks have been treated by contemporary (and older) orthodox theologians. In terms of evolution, Cautheo argues for purpose from the life principle within reality which pushes ever forward. He fails to mention that older evangelicals, such as A.H. Strong and J. Orr recognized that evolution may be describing how God works and does not exclude "involution" in terms of creation ex ni/silo, evolution in terms of progress, and "devolution" in terms of decay due to the primal fall. The late evangelical E. J. Carnell spoke of "threshold evolution."

Cauthen's view of revelation is not the unveiling of a word in deed and proposition from a transcendent God, but the God who is contained within and suffers with his universe, striving for perfection. The older fundamentalism certainly veered away from immanence, deed revelation, and an appreciation of general revelation of natural theology, but contemporary evangelicals are wrestling with the relationship between propositional revelation and other modes of divine disclosure (B. Ramm, C. F. H. Henry, j. I. Packer). Cauthen, of course, categorically dismisses the infallibility of both Scripture and the papacy. This brings us to, perhaps, the major flaw in his book.

It is Cauthen's inability to rescue himself from the older classical liberalism in terms of the proper and rational use of language that is most perplexing. His love for biblical language is clear; his use of it is puzzling. He continually speaks of "the symbolic meaning of the cross and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth" (pp. 9, 129, 137, 140, 141, 145, et als). He does not mean by this the intention of the biblical writer to describe the miraculous, bodily resurrection of Jesus from the tomb. Rather Cauthen is trying to describe his concept of a finite, struggling god in these classical terms. Can meaningful dialogue take place within this context? The creation of the universe is also spoken of in terms of "symbol." Can a valid concept of natural theology or general revelation be erected upon such a use of the biblical language?

In the end, Cauthen's view is a reinterpretation of classical liberalism, for he drives a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history, describes the essence of Christianity as the great love commandment, and denies that the meaning of the cross and resurrection rests upon an event in the objective, historical world. The preaching of neo-orthodoxy is returning to the exhortation of liberalism. God is becoming man, and man is pushing beyond his present state to higher levels: he is becoming God.

It is one thing to sit back and criticize efforts to be Christian, relevant, and credible. It is another thing to speak creatively from a biblical, orthodox, evangelical viewpoint to man in his current agony. If the truth lies within evangelicalism, Cauthen challenges us to produce something better.

Reviewed by Irwin Rein, Associate Professor of Bible and Theology, Houghton College, Houghton, New York.

THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN THEOLOGY AND PSYCHOLOGY edited by Peter Homans. University of Chicago, 1968. 295 pp. $7.95.

Can psychodynamic theory as elaborated by the personality sciences help to clarify the nature of faith? This symposium, originating in the 1966 centennial conference at the University of Chicago Divinity School, offers an answer. Most of the eleven authors studied with Seward IIiltner, to whom the volume is dedicated. As the introduction forecasts, the contributors all reflect in some degree the Chicago school's position on the psychology of religion and theological liberalism.

The tone of the symposium is set in the editor's essay, "Toward a Psychology of Religion: Via Freud and Tillich." Homans notes the demise of the traditional psychology of religion, attributing its decline to the rise of psychoanalysis and Watsonian behaviorism, which removed the conversion experience from the domain of psychology. At the same time, theology rejected religious experience in favor of an existential approach. The resultant splitting of the psychology of religion into theology and psychology produced the pastoral-psychology movement, which is deeply committed to a psychoanalytic orientation. Pastoral psychology has substituted psychotherapy for the conversion experience. Still an applied discipline, it lacks adequate theological integration, recalling the similar plight of the religious-education movement.

Homans proposes to transcend the traditional view of theological anthropology, that there is a realm of reality beyond the processes open to psychological categories and methods. Seeking to formulate a dynamic psychology of the self that will include the subject matter of theology, he points to the propriate striving of Allport, the self-actualization of Maslow, the fully functioning person of Carl Rogers, and the identity formation of Erikson, as lying within the proper territory of theology. He finds in the use of the superego concept by both Freud and Tillich a common element that he believes is amenable both to psychological analysis and religious interpretation.

The dynamic root of sin in the human personality is the subject of an essay by Fred Berthold, who believes that Protestant discussions of sin have refused to face the question of why man turns pridefully away from God. He finds an answer in the psychoanalytic concept of narcissism, which is traced to the "primal anxiety" of the nursing period. The child responds to his awareness of helplessness and materoal dependency with anxiety and aggression, and seeks to turn away from the mother in independence and mastery. The feelings of guilt and unworthiness that follow evoke inordinate self-love to compensate. The basic sin of narcissism is therefore a response to one's feeling of smallness and unworthiness. Berthold does not clarify the source of the child's aggression.

For several of the essayists, Erik Erikson's concept of ego-identity becomes the medium of synthesis between theology and psychology. Psychotherapy concerns itself with insight into identity, and theology concerns itself with revelation. Since both processes lead to transfiguring knowledge, concludes Charles Stinnettc, they represent not human achievement and divine gift but one process of knowing. "Christ enters man's biographical history as the ultimate answer to man's quest for identity and meaning." For Leland Elhard, faith and identity coincide. "Both point to the self-in-God, where one is fully God's self and fully one's own self at the same time."
The chapter by Leroy Aden on pastoral counseling stands out because of its simple thesis and its lack of ambiguity. Pastoral psychology has been more concerned with a psychological than with a theological perspective. A psychological framework such as the Freudian or the Rogcrian has displaced the counselor's own faith. Since Christian faith is the dominant concern in the pastor's profession, it should he the distinctive mark of pastoral counseling. The client's basic struggle is with finitude, alienation, and guilt. These must be met "in the light of the revelation which is disclosed and embodied in Jesus Christ."

The essayists make a strenuous effort to bring theology and psychology into some kind of synthesis. They succeed in placing the two disciplines near each other and throwing across a bridge built by myth, symbol, and elements of personality theory. But the bridge is hardly solid enough for traffic and is not likely to satisfy either side. Indeed, no synthesis is likely to succeed so long as psychology insists upon being rigidly empirical and so long as the Cross remains a scandal.

Reviewed by Orville S. Walters. Professor of Health Science and Lecturer in Psychiatry, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois. Copyright 1968 by Christianity Today; reprinted by permission.

ESCAPE FROM REASON and THE GOD WHO IS THERE by Francis A. Schaeffer. Intervarsity Press, Chicago 1968. 96 pp. 95 cents, and 191 pp. $2.50, respectively.

In these two books, Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer, noted Christian apologist and director of the L'Abri Fellowship in Switzerland, relentlessly pursues the development of modern thought to its inevitable conclusions in belief and practice. He argues that a change in thinking has occurred in every branch of thought, starting with philosophy and proceeding inexorably through art, music, and general culture, finally to theology itself. This change in thinking is crucial. It deals with the way we come to knowledge and truth, and its effects are responsible for the widening generation gap of our day.

Before this change occurred, man thought of knowledge in terms of antithesis, i.e., if something is A, it is not not-A. Truth had meaning; something that was not true was false. Starting with Hegel, however, Schaeffer argues that a subtle but revolutionary change has occurred in man's attitude toward truth. Realizing the impossibility of arriving at a unified picture of all of reality on the basis of man-centered rationalism and scientific methodology, thinkers have relativized truth so that a sharp distinction between truth and falsehood no longer exists. Instead of antithesis, synthesis i5 offered as the guide to progress; given a point of view and its opposite, progress is made by seeking a synthesis between these two apparently conflicting views.

Such a change in thinking represents a surrender of the attempt to develop a unified picture of life that will embrace both the rational aspects of life and the spiritual, grace-related, or freedom-related aspects of life. By setting up a complete barrier between these two spheres of reality, modem man has made it impossible to make the step from rationality to meaning. Realizing intuitively, however, that the impersonal models of himself as a machine that he has developed from rationalism can never stand the test of actual life experience, he has been forced into either complete despair, or into an irrational "leap of faith" that attempts to claim contact in the realm of faith and the spirit, which he has no reason to believe even exists. Such a claimed contact has no basis except experience, cannot be communicated, and ultimately leads to the various modern manifestations of mysticism seen in "chance" art, drugs, pornography, and illusion-oriented drama.

As a contrast to this pattern of seeking to establish spiritual reality by an irrational leap of faith, Dr. Schaeffer presents historic Christianity as a perspective on life that makes possible a unified view of all of reality that can be based upon a rational faith. Rooted in the historic events of the life of the people of Israel, in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, Christianity offers the kind of basic answers to the needs of man that can be found in no other way. Dr. Schaeffer urges an approach to evangelism that recognizes that each man without Christ stands stranded somewhere between his intuitive apprehension of the external world and himself, and the results of his non-Christian presuppositions. The task of the evangelist is to drive home to this man the bankruptcy of his non-Christian presuppositions and then to apply the Gospel of Biblical Christianity.

This is all pretty powerful stuff, and well worth integrating into one's overall perspective on the interaction of Christian faith with life.

Reviewed by Richard H. Babe, Department of Materials Science, Stanford University, Stanford, California.

A second review of The God Who is There

In my office hangs a little motto someone once gave me: "I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure that you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." This summarizes a major problem in communicating with others and it reminds me not to take communication with my colleagues for granted. Dr. Francis Schaeffer, in his book, "The God Who is There", also is concerned about the problem of communicating. His subtitle, "Speaking Historical Christianity into the Twentieth Century" is the unifying theme of the book. Every Christian who is concerned to communicate, or share, his faith with those of the modern world around him, should read it thoughtfully.

Briefly, Schaeffer's point is that we can get into a position to communicate only if (a) we understand the modern world's view correctly, particularly its presuppositional base and the logical consequences thereof; and (b) we ourselves have a consistent Christian view, or coherent system, whose logical consequences are consistent with our experience. Without (a), what the world hears of the gospel from us is not what we meant by it; without (b) we have nothing unique to offer. Schaeffer has himself well communicated, using diagrams and examples that make these and many other cogent and challenging points.

The principal flaw of the book is the tendency to oversimplify. When one holds a comprehensive, or total, view of things, he is able to fit his data into neat categories in that view. It is then possible to pigeon-bole John Cage's music, Henry Miller's books, Paul Klee's art, Martin Buber's philosophy, and Karl Barth's theology with a few paragraphs each. Unless the reader is convinced of exactly the same total view of things, he is bound to feel these oversimplified discussions inadequate, misleading, or disparaging. This feeling will cause the unsympathetic reader to reject the whole book's analysis as shallow, which in spite of brevity it is not. In defense of Dr. Schaeffer on this point it is true that (a) most evangelicals would agree closely enough with him in overall view not to be derailed, and (b) he is reacting to the gross overcomplications perpetrated by the modern theologians and philosophers, who confuse simple Christian truths by semantic exercises in their attempt to inter supernaturalism.

In a brief discussion of the nature of proof there is a pregnant remark for the scientist who would communicate the gospel and he understood: A "reason why modern men reject the Christian answer, or why they often do not even consider it, is because they have already accepted with an implicit faith the presupposition of the uniformity of natural causes in a closed system." (Italics his.) I do not think that Schaeffer here is rejecting a uniformitarian view of nature, for that would be dishonestly ignoring the scientific data. Rather, his emphasis is on the "closed system", i.e. without God, that most people posit. People don't see the natural laws as God's laws, so they easily accept the unwarranted notion that a scientific explanation for an event excludes God from that event. Unfortunately, many Christians have fallen into this trap as well. They are afraid to allow the possibility, for example, that the creation events of Genesis could be described by scientists using natural laws, because they mistakenly see this scientific description as excluding God. As I, and many others, have maintained elsewhere, and as Schaeffer says so well, the Christian and only the Christian has no need to fear the truth. All truth is God's, and it is the truth that sets us free.

One other feature of this book that scientists will appreciate is the emphasis on presuppositions. Of all people, scientists should he most aware of the fact that all systems of thought-scientific or philosophicalare based on assumptions. These assumptions are to be believed. They are not provable, except in the sense that the thought system built on them may be both logically consistent and conform to observable reality. Schaeffer has done the thinking Christian community a service to identify the world's assumptions and contrast them clearly with those of the Christian.

The Christian life is seen in this book as a living demonstration that there is a living God in us. The demonstration is existential as well as propositional; that is, it is true in both experience and logic. The modern world puts much stock in experience, and Schaeffer has shown both why, and indicates bow the evangelical Christian may use this fact in communicating with the world. We must not ignore this divine logic or consistency of Christianity, for the gospel is true. But we must also retain the balance between propositional and existential truth. If Schaeffer seems to emphasize the propositional aspects in this book, it is probably to react against the new theologians' preoccupation with the existential.

The unique contribution of this book is in stressing the need for the Christian to understand the way the world thinks. The book will he particularly helpful to evangelical Christians and, I suspect, quite unacceptable to others for the reasons I have mentioned. The world is not likely to enjoy having the roof torn off its attempts to cover its logical inconsistencies. I would urge evangelical scientists to read it as a starting point for further less simplified study in philosophy, the arts, general culture, and theology of today. It is easy for us to become narrowly specialized and fail to appreciate the impact of Picasso, Dylan Thomas, and others in the world to whom the Great Commission sends us today. But without this understanding of how the world hears, the things we say are bound to he misunderstood.

Reviewed by David L. Dye, Senior Scientist, A. F. Special Weapons Center, Kin/and Air Force Rae, New Mexico.

MECHANICAL MAN by Dean E. Wooldridge. McGraw-Hill, New York 1968. 212 pp. $8.95.

In this book the author of The Machinery of the Brain and The Machinery of Life, Research Associate in Engineering at the California Institute of Technology and a director of TR\V Inc., turns his attention to a popular exposition of the thesis: "Man is only a complex kind of machine." As the jacket states, "Drawing on recent discoveries in the fields of biophysics, biochemistry, neurophysiology, eleetrophysiology, and computer science, Dr. Wooldridge explores the important factors of intelligence and consciousness, as well as the physical and behavioral properties of the human organism. He concludes that all these properties, as well as the origin of life, are entirely the consequence of the normal operation of the ordinary laws of physics in inanimate chemical matter." I expect that there will be several reviews of this book on display in the journal in the near future dealing with the technical aspects raised. Here I will simply give some general reactions to the book as a whole.

Seldom has any book of this type been such an exposition of faith as this one. At every point the faith of the author, guiding from presupposition to conclusion, is clearly in control of the material. In the early chapter on "The Origin of Living Cells", for example, where it is expected that the scientific basis for the more controversial portions of the hook will be carefully laid, there are 20 examples of personal faithjudgment in the six pages from p. 22 to p. 28 alone, as exemplified by the use of such words as "may," "must (have happened)," "(such) was inevitable," "could (happen)," "likely," "ultimately," and "might (have happened)." Finally he concludes the chapter by saying, "No one pretends that such a sequence as that just outlined is a completely true description of the past. All that is claimed is that it is probably 'true to life' in that the events that it portrays are similar enough in quality to those that actually transpired to lead to generally vglid conclusions about the nature, although not necessarily the details, of the prehistory of biology . . . . the principles of evolution, as we have seen, are accounted for by the laws of physics."

But this exercise of faith by the author is as nothing compared to the faith that sustains him in his treatment of the "Social Attitudes" that may be expected to follow from the understanding that man is only a complex machine. About religion, he concludes, "There is obviously no room for a personal God in a world that is rigidly obedient to inexorable physical laws.

This is not to say that complete atheism will be required .  ...There will be no reason why the term 'God' cannot still he used to denote the seemingly inexplicable origin of the laws and particles of physics." Arguing that there is little if any correlation between morality and the Christian faith, he says, "According to our mechanistic point of view, a tendency toward moral behavior is a genetically determined, evolutionary developed physical property of the human animal, just like the number of fingers and the size of the brain." Confronted with the record of man's history, the author remarks, "Of course, men do occasionally lie, steal, commit murder, and perform other antisocial acts. . . Our strong innate compulsion toward moral behavior combined with the flexibility available to social institutions can confidently be expected to prevent such a result (an explosion of crime and immorality)." He recognizes that the realization that he is only a machine may have some adverse effects on man's drive and ambition, but he shrugs this off with, "some decrease in ambition and productivity may result from the general acceptance of the machinelike nature of man, but probably not much." Finally he paradoxically concludes that "the disappearance of the mystical concept of Right and Wrong . . . may result in significant increase in the logical content of human thought.

....Thus disappearance of the idea of absolute right and wrong will be a step in the right direction. Indeed, it may do much to diminish unreasoning prejudice and increase the likelihood of practical and peaceful solutions to the disputes that constantly arise in today's complex world."

The basic issue, of course, is whether the principle of physical reductionism can be supported. Granted that the structure of the parts that compose a man can be described in principle in terms of physics, does this mean that man, the whole, can be completely described in terms of physics as lie engages in interpersonal relationships? The issue is not whether there are unique human experiences that have no counterpart in any physical or chemical process; every human experience -conversion, love, courage-must have some physical land chemical counterpart in the body, especially the brain. The issue, rather, is whether everything about man is explained by a physical and chemical description; once these physical and chemical processes have been discovered, is there nothing else meaningful that can be said about the phenomena involved?

The last words of Wooldridge's book are, "Society profits when its members behave more intelligently. And men who know they are machines should be able to bring a higher degree of objectivity to bear on their problems than machines that think they are Men." I believe the Marquis de Sade also believed that man was only a complex machine ...

THE IDENTITY OF MAN by J. Bronowski. Natural History Press, Garden City, New York 1966.
107 pp. 950 Paperback.

In this little book the author of Science and Human Values turns his attention to the basic question of our day: "Can man be both a machine and a self?" He answers the question in the affirmative.

He builds his case step by step. First he points out that "in order to be unique, it is not necessary to be horn unique." Then he proceeds to point out that the self is constantly in a state of dynamic change and enlargement, that "the self is not something fixed inside my head." The self comes into being in "the unending process by which I turn new experience into knowledge."

To compare the self to a machine it is necessary to know how to define a machine, Bronowski argues that "a machine has an input, a process, and an output, and all three of these must be mechanized." In arriving at the conclusion that the self is something other than a machine, he asserts "that there is a mode of knowledge which cannot be spelled out formally to direct a machine." He calls this mode of knowledge, "knowledge of the self," that results from the recognition of the characteristics of one's own self in other selves, in a process that enlightens both oneself and the other selves involved. He considers knowledge of the self obtained by such a process to be one mode of truth, to be placed alongside scientific knowledge as another mode of truth.
Bronowski puts a good deal of emphasis on the knowledge of self obtained from vicarious participation in literature and poetry as this develops human empathy. He argues that a profound poem "does not tell us how to act, but how to be. A poem tells us how to be human by identifying ourselves with others, and finding again their dilemmas in ourselves." This is the crucial difference between a machine and a man. "Machines do not act in plays, and animals do not pretend to be other animals; they do not know how. This is what cannot be mechanized, even in principle, by any procedure that we can yet foresee."

Finally he argues that the distinction between a sell and a machine is not to be found by analyzing the activities inside the body, but instead of seeing the body within its total interacting environment. This is an important point. Within any given subset of reality, there is the appearance of "machinery." The realities that transcend this machinery are to be encountered in interactions on the level of the wholes involved, and not on the level of the parts.

There are several turns of phrase memorable enough to be quoted. Consider, for example, "We know what it is like for a man to be tired, and for a dog-dog-tired; but we do not know what it is like for a metal to he fatigued."

With all the positive contribution of this book to a critical issue today, it is disappointing to find the author finally falling back upon a kind of scientific humanism. "And when we look into another man for knowledge of our selves, we learn a more intimate respect for him as a man. Our pride in man and nature together, in the nature of man, grows by this junction into a single sense: the sense of human dignity. The ethics of science and of self are linked in this value, clarity with charity, and more than all our partial loyalties it gives a place and a hope to the universal identity of man." Would that we might look into the man Jesus Christ to see there what we might be if our "total loyalty" to God our Creator were seen as the source of knowledge of self.

RUNAWAY WORLD by Michael Green. InterVarsity Press, London 1968. 125 pp. 4s 6d. Paperback.

In this attractively written popular book by the Registrar at the London College of Divinity, the charges of escapism so often leveled against the Christian faith are met head on and then for good measure turned back on those who make them. In a style and context reminiscent of that encountered in Schaeffer's hooks reviewed above, and also found in Set Forth Your Case by Clark H. Pinnoek (Craig Press, Nutley, N.J. 1967), the author examines the areas of history, science, reality, and adventure.

The book is written "in the conviction that the Christian faith itself is the very antithesis of escapism." Dr. Green faces the charge that Jesus never lived with the insistence of the importance of history for Christian faith, He is willing to base a defense of the Christian position on the historicity of Jesus Christ-"a matter not of ideology or mythology but history" and goes on to enumerate the evidence supporting this position. He challenges those who would dismiss Christians as credulous escapists to personally examine the evidence for the Christian claims-and see what happens then.

Dr. Green argues the illogicality of the value placed on man by atheists. "Jesus set a high value on persons because they were made by a personal Cod; the atheist professes high respect for persons despite the fact that they are the products of a quite impassive and impersonal universe . . . . If man is the outcome of a fortuitous concourse of atoms, why on earth should you not manipulate him as you please, provided it is in your power to do so with impunity?"

The perspective on life that finds no room for God because the world is viewed as a closed mechanistic system is labeled absurd by the author for three reasons: (1) it does not answer the ultimate question of why anything exists at all, (2) it gives no satisfactory explanation of aesthetics, ethics or freedom, and (3) even if it were true, on what basis could it be believed to he true since the perspective itself is as meaningless as anything else in such a system. In such a system morality is dissolved. It is "no longer prescriptive (telling us what we ought to do)" but is "merely descriptive (telling us what the majority desire)."

The author faces the challenges of Marx and Freud, as well as those of protagonists who view Christianity wholly in terms of the conformity of church-going. In each case his treatment is stimulating. Finally he challenges his readers to see if perhaps it is they who are running away from Christ.

This is a thought-provoking easily read hook that can be recommended for personal reading and then for passing on to someone else troubled with these questions.

MAKER OF HEAVEN AND EARTH by Langdon Gilkey. Anchor Books, Doubleday, Garden City, New York 1965. 378 pp. $1.45. Paperback.

Occasionally one reads a book that can he described only in terms of superlatives. This hook by Langdon Gilkey, Professor of Theology at the University of Chicago Divinity School, is one of those books. Deep enough to be satisfying but readable enough to be enjoyable, the book abounds with quotable sentences and even paragraphs.

The subtitle of the book is: The Christian Doctrine of Creation in the Light of Modern Knowledge. The subjects include a discussion of the idea and meaning of creation, and the contribution that an understanding of creation can make to an understanding of the nature of God as Creator, the intelligibility of our world, the meaning of life, the nature of evil, the efficacy of the Gospel, the meaning of time, and the language in which we speak about God.

Particularly striking quotations from this hook will be appearing from time to time in the pages of this journal in the near future. (See p. 49.) Typical of the author's appreciation for the roles of science and Christian faith is the following:

"The whole realm of spatiotemporal facts, what can or could be observed about the created world through the sense of man, is a fit arena for scientific investigation, and in this area, for the Christian as for the secularist, scientific method is the most dependable avenue to truth . And let us always remember that no trolls about God's creation can be antithetical to Christian troth. The same God who created the world has revealed Himself in Jesus Christ; thus whatever is true about the world can be no threat to Christian faith . . . . On the other side, Christians believe that this created world, with its system of complex interrelations and its spatiotemporal facts, is dependent upon a deeper dimension of reality and being. The world is not self-sufficient, hot dependent on God as its Creator and its continual preserver. Every fact and event, and every system of facts and events, conies to be and is upheld by the active, creative power of God, which continually gives to every creature its power to be to each new moment, and its power to act and relate itself to other creatures."

Although oriented in a Neo-orthodox perspective, as becomes particularly evident in some of the treatment of the Scriptures in the final chapter of the hook, Dr. Gilkey brings to bear on the many fundamental problems he treats a perceptive understanding of the Christian faith and of the disciplines with which it interacts. This is a book that should be part of the background of every reader of this review.

THE CHRISTIAN STAKE IN SCIENCE by Robert E. D. Clark. Moody Press, Chicago 1967. 160 pp. $3.50

Dr. Clark is a British scientist who served for three years as a scientific editor for Paternoster Press and who is the author of several books relating science and the Christian faith, In this book he has tried to avoid each of three historic positions taken in this area: (1) seize upon scientific findings and use them indiscriminately in defense of Christianity; (2) speculate freely but never communicate our conclusions to others; (3) exercise to keep our minds and lives compartmentalized with science and religion neatly separated to avoid conflict. Dr. Clark argues that if the historical record is examined impartially, it will become evident that most of the time the Christian expectations have been borne out by the progress of scientific investigation, whereas the atheistic or secularistic expectations have not.

To a considerable extent, Dr. Clark is successful in this undertaking. He points out how the Christian expectation has proven accurate in the areas of the limitations on scientific method, the persistence of gaps in knowledge, the inability of science to solve all of man's problems, the humanization of science and its emphases, and the significance of the contingent in the historical record. Even in these cases, however, it is not clear how much of the credit Dr. Clark bestows upon Christian foresight is not more properly identified with Christian hindsight.

In other areas, Dr. Clark's efforts and examples stray somewhat far afield from what might he considered a moderate viewpoint among Christian men of science today. He argues that Christians, contrary to atheists who expected that all kinds of matter were known, have always held that strange forms of matter exist. He goes on to identify the concept of the "ether" with that "half-way" substance that pernuts interaction between spiritual and material. He puts fairly heavy weight on the reality of psychic phenomena, arguing that evidence for the direct action of mind on space is given by the appearance of ghosts, poltergeists-and many of the miraculous biblical appearances. He argues for the uniqueness of man partially on the fact that psychical manifestations have never been found among animals. Mental telepathy to him is so well established that, not only do all Christian accept it, but all atheists as well!

Among other statements that reflect a somewhat aberrant viewpoint are the following: it is quite possible that "the mind is, rather literally, a 'ghost in a machine"'; "the Piltdown forgery was motivated by a desire to spread Darwinism;" "the suggestions that the (Genesis) revelation was made in a series of visions given at night . . . has much in its favor;" "at the Biblical date (of creation of man), God gave to man a new nature conferring on him a god-like quality of mind and fitting him to take dominion over the earth ... there is no need to identify the tool-making man of prehistory ... with man in the image of God;" the synthesis of certain organic compounds by subjecting a mixture to ultraviolet light or electric discharge "arose as a result of atheistic thinking."
Dr. Clark's book contains many helpful emphases for the Christian, but it is doubtful whether the nonChristian scientist in particular will react in the way that Christian expositors of this field would desire.

The review of The Christian Stake in Science was originally published in Eternity, July, 1968, p. 45. Reprinted by permission.