For recent accounts of divine action, see Owen Thomas, ed., God’s Activity in the World: The Contemporary Problem (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1983). Thomas’ typology is recapitulated by <!g>Arthur Peacocke in his own detailed treatment of divine action. See <!g>Theology for a Scientific Age: Being and Becoming— Natural and Divine (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990; and second enlarged edition, London: SCM Press, 1993 and reprinted, Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), chap. 9, section f, p. 146-148.

In a more recent publication, <!g>Ian Barbour offers a lucid description and creative comparison of the problem of divine action in classical <!g>theism, process theism, and their alternatives, including several types of personal agency models. See Barbour, <!g>Religion in an Age of Science, The Gifford Lectures 1989-1991, vol. 1 (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1990), chap. 9.

See also Thomas F. Tracy, ed., The God Who Acts: Philosophical and Theological Explorations (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University, 1994) See also Michael J. Langford in Providence, op. cit., p. 6 and Peacocke, Theology for a Scientific Age, Ch. 9 (especially p. 135).

In my Introduction to Chaos and Complexity I expanded Thomas’ typology to clarify the similarities and differences in approaches to special divine action I provided a working typology which was developed during the <!g>CTNS / Vatican Observatory research on divine action.

See also my Introduction to Chaos and Complexity. I am grateful for extensive interaction with <!g>Nancey Murphy in developing this typology.