Theology and Modern Physics (review)

The sixth in the Ashgate series on Science and Religion, edited by such notables as Roger Trigg (UK) and J. Wentzel Van Huyssteen (United States), Peter E. Hodgson’s surveys the historical interactions between Christian theology and modern science in Western culture. The West signifies Europe, North America, Japan, and other developed countries (221). The genealogy follows the advancement of Christian theology and modern science as developments of Jewish–Christian sources and Greek philosophy and natural philosophy. Christian theology and modern science characterize the unique cultural identity of Western civilization, making possible its highest achievement, namely, modern physics. The twelve chapters of this book divide easily into two main parts, which correspond to Hodgson’s stated purposes. Chapters 1–5 “survey the interaction of theology and science through the centuries, with particular emphasis on the theological problems and pseudo-problems raised by the new physics of the twentieth century” (ix). Chapters 6–11 clarify “misunderstandings” that the new physics evoke for theological views of the world, its internal mechanics, and the theories themselves. Since “theological statements are often based on scientific results that are highly controversial,” Hodgson argues that “a proper understanding of current discussion on theology and the new physics require some knowledge of the development of physics during the preceding centuries” (ix). The book includes a very brief discussion on “Science and Non-Christian Religions” (chapter 12) and a short summarizing epilogue.

Hodgson sees theology as “the result of our rational attempts to understand God and His [sic] relation with us and with the natural world. It is based on Divine Revelation and on the teaching of the Church as contained in the Old and New Testaments, the decrees of church councils and other church documents” (3). Theology has an “unchanging essence” that is derived from Hebrew and Greek “philosophical concepts,” which get clarified from time to time by councils (3). Although theology has sometimes borrowed terms derived from the sciences, unlike its theological essence, this use of science requires updating as the sciences change. This puts theology in a rather precarious position for as “a new scientific idea is generally accepted long before it is definitively established. It is also unwise for theology to move too rapidly because the new scientific idea may not long survive” (3). Theology is typified as rational discourse, with an unchanging essence, dependent on Jewish–Christian inheritance, Greek philosophy, and scientific terminology. For all three paragraphs Hodgson gives toward defining the role of theology in this book, theology appears rather parasitic in nature.

Philosophy fares a little better than theology. It receives eight paragraphs stipulating it also as a rational discourse oriented toward systems making. Unlike theology, whose legitimacy is based on revelatory and ecclesiastical authority, philosophy’s legitimacy is a derivation of reason and the acceptance of fundamental presuppositions. “A great philosopher,” says Hodgson, “is one who has worked out the consequences of the starting point with thoroughness and consistency to the (often bitter) end. Whether the philosophical system is true is another matter, though that is usually settled by the examination of its fruits” (4). Not only a system making discourse, philosophy also functions as referee over the reasonableness of our claims and the meaning of words and concepts, the manner in which they relate to each other, what we mean by what we say and how we know what we say to be true; it scrutinizes the criteria we apply and how we justify those criteria (4). Philosophy, therefore, acts as referee for the reasonableness of our claims.

Compared with the brief eleven paragraphs Hodgson gives to defining theology and philosophy, he spends twenty-two paragraphs laying out his account of physics as modern science. Contrasted to what he calls “primitive science,” which describes “the properties of materials gained by craftsmen working with wood, stone and metals, and that of plants and animals obtained by observation and experiment” (6), it may also include observable celestial knowledge characteristic of past civilizations and not descriptive of “the knowledge we have today...