John Polkinghorne has gone as far as to call Farrer’s account ‘theological doublespeak’ (Polkinghorne, J, Science and Christian Belief: Reflections of a bottom-up thinker (London: SPCK, 1994) p82). Philip Clayton suggests that if this model of divine agency claims any more than the mere sustaining of natural causes then ‘it envisions a type of continuous divine intervention in the world that is no weaker than the classical accounts of miracles’ (Clayton, P, God and Contemporary Science [Edinburgh: Edinburgh Academic Press, 1997] p177).