SCIENCE, DIVINE AGENCY AND THE POTENCY OF PRAYER

Faith and Philosophy, 2014

Many maintain that petitionary prayer is pointless. I argue that the theist can defend petitionary prayer by giving a general account of how divine and creaturely causation can be compatible and complementary, based on the claim that the goodness of something depends on its cause. I use Thomas Aquinas’s metaphysical framework to give an account that explains why a world with creaturely causation better reflects God’s goodness than a world in which God brought all things about immediately. In such a world, prayer could allow us to cause good things in a distinctive way: by asking God for them.

Zygon®, 2008

The topic of divine action has been central to the theology-and-science discussion over the last twenty years. Some tentative conclusions are currently being drawn in light of research initiatives that have been engaged on this topic. I review three recent books that have responded in some way to the ongoing discussion. These responses show that, notwithstanding the advances made in the conversation, much work remains to be done before a plausible theory of divine action emerges at the interface of theology and science.

2022

An essay on prayer (mainly in Judaism) added in 2022 to the book Theology.

Ars Disputandi, 2003

2009

Recent years have seen a shift in divine action debates. Turning from noninterventionist, incompatibilist causal joint models, representatives of a " theological turn " in divine action have questioned the metaphysical assumptions of approaches seeking indeterministic aspects of nature wherein God might act. Various versions of theistic naturalism (such as Thomism, panentheistic naturalism, and pneu-matological naturalism) offer specific theological frameworks that reimagine the basic God–world relationship. But do these explicitly theological approaches to divine action take scientific knowledge and methodology seriously enough? And do such approaches adequately address the problem of how uncreated, immaterial realities could affect physical, material processes? This article examines various features of the theological turn in divine action—recognizing it as a welcome step in science and religion, while challenging its current adequacy.

If prayer is an exclusively human activity and the defining religious act, what place can prayer have with the theology of creation? This paper explores prayer in the context of creation ex nihilo, the human person as microcosm in whose prayer creation is gathered, and creation as instructing prayer. This paper is frequently in conversation with Jean-Louis Chrétien's phenomenology of prayer in 'The Ark of Speech'.

European Journal for Philosophy of Religion

A number of modern theologians have concluded that the rise of natural science makes it necessary to give up the idea that God acts in particular ways to affect the course of events in the world. I reply to this claim, taking up the challenge to explain what might be meant by a ‘special’ act of God. There are several ways to conceive of such acts, including the possibility that God might determine what is left determinable in the structures of nature, e.g., at the quantum level. I address objections to this view, and consider metaphysical puzzles that it presents.

Faith and Philosophy, 2019

Faith and Philosophy 390 risk-free versions of providence, but that it does worse. One central issue concerning the morality of risk is how the risk is distributed among those involved in the event. Welty points out that whatever the risks are that God takes, he does not suffer from them the way human beings often do. Welty asks a series of questions such as, "Will [God] perish due to lack of food, water, shelter, and good health? No." This one question is enough to see that for all the talk of God's risks, on open theism, it is the creatures that are most vulnerable. There is at least a prima facie case that God is more morally responsible if he adopts risky providence by creating a world with an open future than if he maintains a risk-free providence. Welty's essay is simply excellent. His treatment of these themes is very careful. He draws on the writings of open theists as he lays out the details of the four relevant aspects of the problem of evil. In addition, he raises relevant objections to his assessments and answers them. This chapter will provide impetus for continued work for years to come. In a short review, I can do no more than gesture at the contents of this book. Many of the essays warrant a deeper look. The collection as a whole has several strengths that are worth mentioning. First, the papers vary widely in topic and in philosophical perspective. They range over several metaphysical issues as well as issues more central to philosophical theology. The collection demonstrates that issues related to divine foreknowledge touch a wider variety of the different fields within philosophy than might be expected. The authors also vary in their philosophical commitments. Some are compatibilists and some are libertarians. Some are atemporalists and some hold that God is temporal. This diversity strengthens the collection. Third, the quality of each essay is very good. Both open theists and critics of open theism will find much to think about. I highly recommend this work.

2018

One major view concerning science-faith relationship is that the two are inevitable enemies and that as science advances; there will be no need for religion in human affairs. A cardinal example of this thesis is the view that since science is advancing and some human problems which were solved religiously are taken care by science, there is no need to take recourse to religious practices like prayer in the pursuit of answer to human questions. In view of this, using Plantinga’s science-faith integration hypothesis as the theoretical framework, this paper examined the physical relevance of prayer in medicine as a proof to the plausibility of science-faith inter-dependence.