Down the centuries, science and religion have often appeared to be in conflict, the requirement for evidence in scientific matters seeming to sit awkwardly with the basis in faith of theistic belief. For many, the apparent contest between creation and evolution through natural selection polarises the debate. This triggered the famous exchange between Charles Darwin's bulldog, TH Huxley, and William Wilberforce, Bishop of Oxford (who, for wit, in our opinion, has the better of the exchange) at the 1860 Oxford meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science: “would it be through his grandfather or his grandmother that [Huxley] claims descent from a monkey?” chided the Bishop; remarking to Sir Benjamin Brodie, seated by his side, ‘the Lord hath delivered him into mine hands’, Huxley replies that “he is not ashamed to have a monkey as an ancestor; but he would be ashamed to be connected with a man who used great gifts to obscure the truth”—remarks that evidently had an effect sufficient to cause ladies to faint, and journalists present to ‘jump out of their seats’ (see Leonard Huxley: Life and Letters of TH Huxley, 1900: Vol 1; pp 183–189). This exchange enlivened a session made rather dreary by Dr John William Draper of New York who had ‘droned out his paper’ on Intellectual development of Europe considered with reference to the views of Mr Darwin, a theme later developed in his monograph History of the conflict between religion and science (1873). WHR Rivers argued in his Fitzpatrick lectures to the Royal College of Physicians of London (1915–1916: published posthumously in 1924) that ‘Medicine, Magic and Religion’ are each abstract terms connoting social processes by means of which mankind seeks to safeguard life. Therefore, the differences are perceived not real, and the relationship is close. Religion involves the belief of some power greater than man himself, and magic co-opts man-made rites to explain morbidity, whereas medicine defines a set of social activities by which man seeks to control natural phenomena that disrupt physical and social functions. For Rivers, the common origin of these concepts is best revealed through studying the beliefs and practices of ‘rude cultures’—in his case, the peoples of Melanesia. In ‘Spirituality and wellbeing: some recent discussions’, Alister McGrath dispenses with the ‘warfare’ model of science and religion, separating spirituality from the ideas of traditional religions, and elevating worldviews of the individual person that aspire to ‘meaning in life’. Professor McGrath traces the need of individuals in a postmodernist world for freedom to contemplate more than just the favoured Rationalist model of human existence. And he hints at evidence, the stuff of science, that religious commitment does indeed affect wellbeing and longevity: in short, faith works. With a background in chemistry and molecular biophysics prior to studying theology, Alister McGrath, Professor of Historical Theology in the University of Oxford, is well placed to debate ‘an informed engagement between science and religion’. He reviews The spiral staircase: a memoir by Karen Armstrong; The sacred neuron: extraordinary discoveries linking science and religion by John Bowker; Spirituality and the healthy mind: science, therapy and the need for personal meaning by Mark Galanter; and Consciousness and the mind of God by Charles Taliaferro (page 278). His own most recent book is Dawkins's God: genes, memes and the meaning of life (2004). Avoiding any hint of evangelism, critical of anything that smacks of sophistry in hand-waving amateur neuroscience (Bowker), supportive of the position that attention to opinions on the meaning of life has to be part of understanding psychiatric morbidity (Galanter), unashamedly admiring of expressions of faith that articulate an integrative theism (Taliafero), and sensitive to events that challenge that faith (Armstrong), Professor McGrath has two messages: any who venture an opinion on human judgement should first acquire a passing acquaintance with contemporary neuroscience; and an evidence-base is beginning to emerge supporting the view that spirituality is conducive to wellbeing, and so of relevance to the study of health and disease.