In the past decades, theologians have endeavored to revive Christian ecumenical doctrines that are relevant to contemporary ecological discourse, especially as the world grapples with escalating environmental crises. Among the works that have made it to the list are Ian McFarland's From Nothing, Norman Wirzba's Food and Faith, and Elizabeth Johnson's Creation and the Cross. However, compared with these theologians, one author stands out for taking a more radical hermeneutic stance: Rebecca L. Copeland and her book, Created Being: Expanding Creedal Christology. I believe the subscribers of Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science might be interested in what she has to say to Christian readers in regard to the relationship between modern biology and theology. In this review, I aim to simply unpack her methodology instead of presenting copious analyses of each chapter.

In this book, Copeland seeks to recover the meaning of Christ's identity as a “created substance” (created ousia) through the lens of evolutionary biology. The main call of this book is quite simple: by recognizing Jesus’ dual identities as both “created” and “divine” substance in our (re)reading of Nicene Christology, readers can more readily acknowledge the expanded scope of God's salvific act, which affects all creaturely existences without exception, and renounce the Western tendency to falsely treat the environment.

After explaining how Nicene Christology has been criticized as “unjust, incoherent, and implausible” in Chapter I, Copeland provides in three sequential chapters (II–IV) scientific and historical‐theological analyses centered on ancient hierarchical‐biological systems. These analyses later generate theological and ethical implications, as presented in Chapter V. However, or unfortunately, readers need to first explore her article titled “Ecomimetic Interpretation: Ascertainment, Identification, and Dialogue in Matthew 6:25–34,” which was published separately, in order to fully grasp her methodology. This is particularly important as the author frequently employs terms such as “ecomimetic investigation,” “ecomimetic interpretation,” and “ecomimetic engagement” throughout the book, which are not adequately explained in any of the chapters.

In the fields of engineering and design, a new industrial turn called the “biomimicry movement” offers engineers and designers a way to address contemporary technical issues by closely examining biological organisms or the complex processes exhibited by those organisms. Building on this approach, she invites her readers to deeply and microscopically investigate the characteristics of all earthly entities, including abiotic ones, that are often neglected in sacred texts, conciliar documents, and otherliterature. As readers are now biologically and environmentally informed, a reading of the text will result in a different, sometimes more detailed, understanding. “Ecomimetic engagement,” as she declares in Created Being, “with representatives from a broad spectrum of created beings from rocks to highly intelligent birds can shape this definition [of created ousia] in ways that intentionally counteract the anthropocentric assumptions that have traditionally shaped christological reflection” (33).

Chapter III is particularly noteworthy as the author meticulously observes various nonhuman existences, ranging from inanimate material bodies to rational animals, and discovers shared characteristics that Aristotle had previously associated only with human beings. She contends that the notion of “created ousia” in Christian theology ought to be comprehended as the “shared condition” of all of creation, incorporating traits like multiplicity, interdependence, and mutual transformation instead of being limited solely to the term “humans.” This critical shift reaffirms her argument in Chapter II, namely that phrases like “consubstantial (homoousios) with us” (Chalcedon) and “consubstantial (homoousios) with the Father” (Nicaea) did not establish a God/human dichotomy but rather a divine/created dichotomy. This view is supported by the fact that the early Patristic Christological discourse “carried an implicit affirmation that everything that is not God shares in created ousia” (19). In Chapter IV, Copeland delves into “Salvation Christologies,” which often describe Jesus’ incarnation and its purpose as only “for us and for our salvation” (63). In contrast, “Creation Christology” posits that God's decision to incarnate was to overcome estrangement and include the creation in divine communion, based upon the previously argued understanding of ousia. This view sees Jesus’ incarnation and its salvific purpose as extending not only to those who are able to understand the idea of salvation but to every sentient being in the entire galaxy.

I find Created Being to be an interdisciplinary work yet holds significant dogmatic value. Its interdisciplinary nature arises from its potential to pique the interest of those who wish to explore the intersection of biology and theology. For instance, readers may be captivated by the author's discussion of the western scrub‐jay, or Aphelocoma californica, and their “mourning behavior” in the context of examining Aristotle's criterion for the “rational soul” that distinguishes between human and animal bodies. In this analysis, she contends that certain animals possess “rational” capabilities. She notes, “Study of western scrub‐jay caching has led researchers to hypothesize that these little birds possess several cognitive capacities that were once believed to belong to human beings alone” (45). Moreover, this book also holds significant dogmatic value because, by blurring the line between human and nonhuman creatures in creedal document, this work could serve as a dogmatic foundation for contemporary discourse, such as transhumanism or evolution, as exemplified in the works of Teilhard de Chardin, Thomas Berry, and Ilia Delio, who have played a significant role in rethinking Christology from the perspective of the end (future). Copeland's Christology, however, develops from the perspective of the beginning (tradition).

One may argue that this book is still entrenched in anthropocentrism. Admittedly, Copeland's ecomimetic interpretation employs Aristotelian categories such as “rationality” or “movement” to describe biotic and abiotic existences. To be sure, if anthropocentrism means an inability to eliminate our biases in proposing terminology to describe nonhuman existences, then this book, along with any other works, can never possibly be nonanthropocentric. In my reading, Copeland adopts a reductio ad absurdum strategy that is effective in debunking Aristotelian biases. Yet, this strategy does not imply a desire to be complicit in anthropocentrism that could limit the impact of Christ's incarnational action. Moreover, Copeland herself might also have recognized the distinction between anthropocentric (centered in human) and anthropogenic (generated by human), where the latter is inevitable.

Created Being is both comprehensible and well targeted. Although the author does not explicitly state her intended audience at the outset, her theological ideas and ethical perspectives are presented in an engaging and compelling manner that can be readily grasped by individuals with no background in systematic theology. Furthermore, the book's concise length, clocking in at fewer than 100 pages, is likely to appeal to younger audiences. As such, I wholeheartedly recommend this work to young ecological activists, new‐coming theologians, or biology students seeking to broaden their comprehension of the intersections between theology, biology, and ecology.