^[1] Following the baby boom of philosophical reflection on religion in the mid-twentieth century, it is time for the grandchildren to set out the family ties. The series Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy of Religion aims to draw the genealogical tree, and Prof. Brian Shanley, O.P., of the Catholic University of America has written the second volume on Thomism.

^[2] The purpose of the book is to introduce the different ways Thomists have developed Aquinas’ thought on central topics in contemporary philosophy of religion. The aim is also to promote exchanges between Thomism and other philosophical schools. Thus the volume can inform both those coming from other traditions and those within wishing to hand down Thomism. The chapters cover well-known, leading topics within contemporary philosophy of religion: faith and reason, theistic reference, the problem of evil, theistic ethics, theistic metaphysics, and the plurality of religions. It is not easy to travel over these from a Thomist perspective, as the tradition is heteronymous; but Shanley summarises intramural debates well. The book begins with a historical survey of twentieth-century Thomist schools. Most of the other chapters begin with Aquinas’ own view and then proceeds with contemporary interpretations or applications of the topic at hand. Each chapter can be read on its own.

^[3] Writing a volume such as this one poses both historical and philosophical difficulties. At the outset Shanley correctly remarks, that ‘the set of topics currently considered to fall within the domain of the philosophy of religion does not map easily into the traditional Thomistic universe of discourse because it combines into one philosophical discipline what Thomists would want to separate into two formally distinct disciplines of theology and philosophy.’ (p. xi) For example, in the modern formulation of the problem of evil, Thomists would want to include the theological doctrines of providence and Christology. Shanley is historically sensitive and deems Aquinas primarily as a theologian, so that theological doctrines are introduced when they are necessary in explaining the philosophical argument. Shanley skilfully deals with properly philosophical topics as well as properly philosophical evidence, and only explicitly introduces theology when it is required.

^[4] Philosophically there is a problem why one thinker should be adhered to above others. Philosophy is wary of giving someone authority. Aquinas is though worthy of serious philosophical consideration not so much for who he was, but because of the subjects and powerful arguments he presents. Shanley’s attitude to Aquinas is not uncritical: ‘I treat Aquinas as a participant in an ongoing philosophical dialogue, where his views can continue to be attractive in their original form or can become attractive through creative reinterpretation.’ (p. xii). Approached in this way, the study of Aquinas is truly philosophically rewarding.

^[5] This is a very good book on the Thomist way of philosophising about religion. (There is the occasional lacuna of confusing apophatic theology with positive theology, and kataphatic theology with negative theology on p. 44.) The focus is sometimes narrowly Roman Catholic. This is not only surprising, since, as Shanley himself notes, medieval philosophy is no longer a predominantly Roman Catholic enterprise, but also since Aquinas was arguably the most influential philosopher among Protestants up until Kant. (Since then, of course, Protestant theologians are generally philosophically unsophisticated.) But the wealth of references provides a valuable resource for further studies, not least because of its multilingual nature. However, it is regrettable that there is no separate bibliography at the end. It is not very helpful to find subsequent references by mere author name or sometimes with title (in particular as titles are not referred to in a uniform way). In these days of computer-generated bibliographies, such a want seems inexcusable, especially for a very costly volume. The lack of bibliography prompts eager reading, and this is certainly a book worth eager reading. This historically informed discussion of standing topics has much to offer contemporary philosophers of religion.