THIS intriguing symposium homes in on a theological phenomenon that has ebbed and flowed through the course of Christian history, and is now attracting renewed attention on both sides of the Atlantic.
The format is ambitious, with five views articulated by five voices, each contributing a position statement, and four responses to the respective position statements of the others, plus a response to the others’ responses to their opening gambit!
This inevitably results in a good deal of repetition and stylistic variation, to which readers must adjust as they go along. Some of the responses are pretty terse and somewhat defensive but, as one contributor observes, “In this performance of peer accountability, the responses can begin to reflect on, and elucidate, the nature and status of disagreements . . . as an act of clarifying and purifying the conversation.”
Furthermore, could it be that the overall effect precisely reflects the state of the question? That is, where does natural theology stand in the span of resources informing theological reflection and the philosophy of religion? The spectrum of possibilities is replete with examples from Aristotle to Alister McGrath, with Thomas Aquinas, William Paley, and Karl Barth as players in a drama that divides opinion even as it attempts to bridge divides between reason and revelation, religion and science, immanence and transcendence, theism and naturalism.
After a satisfyingly concise history of the subject by the two American-based editors, first up is Charles Taliaferro of St Olaf College, offering a “philosophical reflection on God based on reasoning that does not rely on revelation”. He provides “a contemporary view” updating classical arguments for the existence of God.
After responses from the other contributors, this leads seamlessly into Andrew Pinsent’s “Catholic View”, citing Aquinas and Newman in defence of natural theology, but only up to a point. Ultimately, it cannot substitute for such “supernatural understanding of supernatural matters”, which relies on being in a state of grace.
Situated at the heart of the book is Alister McGrath’s contribution, described as a “classical view”. It pursues a characteristically Anglican methodology, “hinting at a relationship of disclosure or insight between the world of nature and the transcendent reality of God”. Here, McGrath effectively holds the ring in relation to the other contributors, and acts as something of an honest broker across the piece. His is a masterly summary of the issues and their implications for Christianity today.
A more pugnacious contribution is made by Paul Moser, of Loyola University in Chicago, who seeks “to deflate the pretensions of natural theology”, principally because it fails to point to the actual God of Christianity worthy of worship.
The Barthian challenge to natural theology is resolutely rehearsed by John McDowell, an Australian academic, and is subject to the most incisive of the responses. McDowell quotes with approval Rowan Williams’s critique of theological discourse that presents itself as finished, complete in and of itself. Yet, Barth himself is far from immune to such criticism, because, as McGrath observes, “Barth engages with a specific and limited approach to natural theology.”
In the course of their exchanges, the contributors generally stand by their basic positions, but there is some evidence that the cogency of challenges is acknowledged, even if minds are not significantly changed.
Pinsent credits Barth with enabling us “to develop a responsible natural theology”. Clearly, this is also the editors’ ambition for this multi-view format, and it is a commendable effort.
The Rt Revd Dr John Saxbee is a former Bishop of Lincoln.
Natural Theology: Five views
John C. McDowell, Alister E. McGrath, Paul K. Moser, Andrew Pinsent, and Charles Taliaferro
James K. Dew, Jr., and Ronnie P. Campbell, Jr., editors
Baker Academic £19.99
(978-1-5409-6044-3)
Church Times Bookshop £17.99