Faith and the Marvelous Progress of Science by Brendan Leahy (review)

Abstract

Faith and the Marvelous Progress of Science, Brendan Leahy (ed.) (New York: New City Press, 2015), 190 pages. The tense, often fractious, debate between those who profess a strong religious faith and those who espouse a scientific world view can occupy considerable time and space in the popular media. The tensions can often appear irreconcilable on either side. In view of this, Faith and the Marvelous Progress of Science, edited by Dr Brendan Leahy, Bishop of Limerick and former Professor of Systematic Theology in Maynooth, is a timely publication. It puts forward the view that the Church has no desire to hold back the marvellous scientific progress in question and, instead, wishes to celebrate the progress of reason in the search of truth. To cite the words of Pope Francis, this collection of essays perfectly captures the need for open discourse so that ‘all of society can be enriched thanks to [the] dialogue, which opens up new horizons for thought and expands the possibilities of reason’. All the contributors, from the perspective of believers, have a deep and profound understanding of both faith and scientific endeavour. Perhaps this is best articulated by Brother Guy Consolmagno SJ, Director of the Vatican Observatory, ‘I am a fanatic about my science. I love it; it’s what I do. (And I am something of a nerd about my Church)’. His essay provides a very useful reflection on the nature of the split between science and religion around the time of Galileo. Drawing on his own rich Jesuit formation, Consolmagno cites Robert Bellarmine who gave a document to Galileo certifying that he was not a heretic. Rather, Bellarmine was open to the progress of new ideas and a belief that Scripture may not necessarily have the last word on revealed truth. Science, it can be argued, is not a book of facts; rather it is a conversation with itself and among its own followers. Theology, therefore, would appear to be excluded from such exchanges. Put simply, one cannot have a conversation if no one is listening! Throughout these essays individual authors repeatedly call for a conversation to be carried on amongst those who write from myriad positions in an attempt to enter into a fruitful and meaningful dialogue. Each one clearly believes that only when a mature and open conversation happens can truth reveal itself in all its splendour. Theeditorhascleverlydividedthebookintothreecoherentsections.Section one draws the reader into the historic debates that have taken place over the centuries and, in so doing, nicely situates the contemporary arguments. In Spring 2017: Book Reviews 134 Studies • volume 106 • number 421 light of the foregoing comments, in this section Patricia Kelly, lecturer in Catholic Studies at Leeds Trinity University, most interestingly argues that theology must be reimagined as a science and draws on the rich writings of French Dominican Marie-Dominique Chenu (1895–1990) to illustrate her points. Using Chenu’s work, she insists that theology and science should work together at understanding creation in its totality. Chenu’s work found fault with the medieval split that occurred in theological circles, and which has rendered theology almost redundant in the scientific laboratories of today. In her clever and reflective piece, Kelly provides a fresh lens through which theologians may explore the world, unhindered from unfortunate errors of the past. Giventhenatureofthehistoricdebatesbetweenthe‘altarandthelaboratory’, section two provides a refreshing analysis of some of the contemporary issues dominating the landscape. William Reville, Professor of Biochemistry at University College Cork, asks the pertinent question, ‘Can it be reasonable for a scientist to believe in God?’ In other words, in light of Darwin’s theory of evolution and the popularity of Richard Dawkins, the question arises as to whether religious belief must now be regarded as irrational. If one does believe, is this simply ‘indulging in woeful ignorance’? Reville’s essay is an excellent example of contemporary religious apologetics. He offers a telling response to Dawkins’ firm assertion that ‘God’ is a redundant concept. In response, Reville uses Darwin himself to answer Dawkins’ claims and, in so doing, renders the negative force of Dawkins and his fellow ‘new atheists’ somewhat negligible. Contrary to popular belief and opinion, atheism by scientific endeavour may not necessarily be...