Lord Northbourne in this essay analyzes the viewpoint of many modern scientists that certain fundamental events occurring in the domain of sub-atomic physics are exempt from laws of causality—in other words, that these events are random, or occur by chance. The author is most concerned that "from this position it is but a step to a declaration that the ruling principle of the universe is chance, and not a principle of strict causality. There are then no longer any certainties, but only probabilities.…" Of course, this is a challenge to any philosophy that "takes a metaphysical or religious turn." Lord Northbourne leads the reader through a logical process of reasoning to conclude that within our reality there is, indeed, order by design, and that the Principle and Its manifestations cannot be reduced to the random operations of chance.

J. C. Cooper, in this review of Science is God, sums up its virtues with "The book is eminently readable and contains a great deal of sense." She highlights several fundamental points that the author, Professor David F. Horrobin, makes in the book, covering the correct limits of science, its inability to prove or disprove religious phenomena such as miracles, its appropriate place in education and reforms that must be implemented to assure this, and the expanding of "science" to such inherently subjective disciplines as Economics, Sociology and Education.

This is another review by J. C. Cooper. Here, she examines a book that is an account of its author's archaeological travels, and whose purpose is to "bring to us a sense of meaning of the past and give awareness of man's striving toward fulfillment and a valid communion between the dead and the living, correlating the past and the present." The reviewer suggests that the musings of the author might make this book one that traditionalist/perennialist readers would enjoy for its approach towards ancient peoples.

In this article Philip Sherrard explains the theories and writing of Teilhard De Chardin as they apply to the split of science and faith in modern thought and the ways in which Chardin seeks to reconcile this separation. Chardin’s evolutionary theory is fueled by the power of “becoming” and “self creation”. It contains both physical and conscious progression in a personal and collective context. To Chardin, the individual is not responsible for the highest realization of self, but instead the highest form of the universe. In order to reconcile these differences of the personal and the collective, Chardin applies a faith-oriented theory in which he integrates the role of the Omega (or the Christ) in which the personal and the collective potentials are centered on each other and therefore both are fulfilled. Besides the inconsistencies this theory demonstrates in regard to faith, Sherrard also explores the way that it proves science as an incomplete mode of philosophy.

After giving a short introduction to the history of thought surrounding evolutionism and religious doctrine, Martin Lings discusses and criticizes Dewar’s condemnation of evolutionism. Lings then presents and summarizes the ways in which Dewar constructs and supports his argument, approaching it from many different angles (physical, geological, paleontological, geographical, etc.). In the conclusion of his review, Lings says, “Most people are altogether ignorant of this [Ed.: i.e. that the theory of evolution requires its own 'miraculous' leaps of faith] and other equally significant facts that The Transformist Illusion lays bare. One result of this ignorance is the flood of books by non-scientists about the history of mankind, books for adults and books for children, which take evolution altogether for granted…”

Lord Northbourne lays out what he sees as the essential factors to the much debated question of the relationship between religion and science; what that relationship should be and what it is in the modern world. Northbourne explains what is meant by these terms and why the distinction and relationship is necessary to understanding our views of the universe and our roles in it.

Michael Negus presents “an interpretation of the fossil record within the framework of cycles and principles rather from a viewpoint of accidentals and ‘progress’ which characterize the profane mentality.” Negus presents fossil science with the guiding theme it has its first principle in God.

The influence of modern science on nature and the way that this has affected the everyday existence and view of man is the main topic of this article. Nasr discusses the idea that man has become inwardly detached from the Intellect which is what keeps him tied to something permanent. The development of secular science and how it has focused people on the idea of change and becoming is another topic discussed in this article. The concepts of permanence and impermanence in science as opposed to nature are covered with careful detail in this article. Towards the end Nasr concludes that “as far as the present sciences of nature are concerned, much though they differ from the various traditional cosmologies, even here there is an element of permanence is one takes science for what it really is.”

Lord Northbourne examines the way that humans conceive of all-possibility and possibility in the world. In this article the physical universe is regarded as a single complex possibility rather than an example of all-possibility. The human concept of laws and limits is also discussed here, and Northbourne states that the individual is responsible for knowing that there are laws in his universe. Towards the end of this article, religion is addressed in relation to the subject of all-possibility, possibility, and limits. According to Northbourne “religion is only indirectly concerned with the multiple states of being as they affect non-human entities, animate or inanimate.”