Anthony GODZIEBA. A Theology of the Presence and Absence of God. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2018. Pp. viii, 331.$49.95 (Amazon).LCCN 2018010934/ISBN 9780814663585 Reviewed by Joseph A. BRACKEN, S.J., Xavier University, Cincinnati, OH 45207

Anthony Godzieba, Professor of Theology and Religious Studies at Villanova University and longtime editor of Horizons, the Journal of the College Theology Society, distinguishes in this book between  “the classical dialectical view of God, the understanding that God is simultaneously ‘present’ (knowable, available) and ‘absent’ (mysterious, uncontrollable)” and what he calls “the extrinsic view, the transcendence, inconceivability, and even, as an extreme reaction, the non-existence of God” (31).Yet, as a result of the spread of the influence of the extrinsic view in contemporary Western society, there is a problem  with determining who God is and where God is to be found.  Godzieba’s solution is to review carefully the role of natural theology in the writings of Anselm and Aquinas in the middle ages and in the work of Hans Küng, Jon-Luc Marion, Walter Kasper and others at the present time.  All in different ways agree that “human experience by its very nature is open to infinite transcendence and participates in a dynamic movement toward God that can be more fully articulated through a faith-commitment to God’s further self-revelation” (104).  Then in the theological part of the book he carefully sketches the development of the doctrine of the Trinity from apostolic times to the end of the Second Council of Constantinople in 553 AD and then reviews the rapid growth of Trinitarian theology in the 20th century at the hands of Karl Barth, Karl Rahner, Jürgen Moltmann, Walter Kasper, John Zizioulas, Catherine LaCugna and others.  In this way, Godzieba confirms the classical dialectical relationship between natural theology and “theological theology” in a more contemporary idiom: namely, that God is love, an unmerited gift from outside oneself but better understood through antecedent reflection on one’s  human experience of transcendence (272-73).

This book is too complex to analyze and critique in detail.  Hence, I will content myself with a few summary remarks. Godzieba’s book is in many ways a recapitulation of the work of a lifetime in academic theology.  It is painstakingly documented and argued with care and precision.  Hence, I certainly recommend it for use in graduate level courses in Christian theology.  I am, however, less sure that the book will be successful in courses directly dealing with the relation between theology and science. For, as I see it, natural scientists and their sympathizers may well reject Godzieba’s thesis that both the desire for and unexpected experience of transcendence in human life is a sure sign of the presence of God. For, they adhere to the principle of methodologicalnaturalism whereby one analyzes physical reality simply in terms of natural causes and effects.  Thereby they not deny the existence of God but limit themselves to what can be empirically verified.  Admittedly, many scientists have as a result likewise endorsed ontological naturalism, the belief that God does not exist. But this claim (like belief in the existence of God)  cannot be justified via rational investigation of empirical reality. I tend to side with the scientists on this point.  Natural theology is never free of antecedent faith-claims.  Aquinas’s five ways to prove the existence of God uniformly ended with the words “And this is what men call God,” a faith-claim.  Similarly, the appeal of Rahner and other Neo-Thomists to the experience of God as the ever-receding horizon of their striving for self-transcendence is likewise an implicit faith-claim. In point of fact, the strong desire for transcendence might be a “useless passion,” as Jean-Paul Sartre claimed years ago.  A much safer position for Christian philosophers and theologians in dealing with natural scientists and their sympathizers would be to admit the provisional character of one’s faith-claims but then evaluate them against the implicit metaphysical presuppositions of those who support a materialistic world view. In this way, both sides would be arguing bottom-up from common human experiences, not top-down from unstated antecedent faith-claims. For much the same reason, I myself would ground the absence and presence of God within human experience, not in the alleged unfathomable mystery of divine subjectivity, but in reflection on human intersubjective relations.  For, life-time friends and long-term married couples are still baffled at times in their dealings with one another. The loved one is still “other” than oneself in unexpected ways.