Debi & I went to see the movie Angels & Demons the other day. It’s a thriller whose central premise tries to generate drama from the conflict of science and religion.
The movie and the book on which it is based makes much of the conflict which goes something like this: Science is about facts.
Science tells us of things that are proven, that we can know with certainty. Religion is about beliefs and faith. Religion
concerns things that we cannot prove, but that one must simply believe. Science is progressive while religion seeks to oppress
science.
There is a problem when this myth is pushed to the extreme, science being seen as rational,
enlightened, and standing on the side of knowledge. On the other side you have Christianity and other religions are viewed
as backwards, superstitious, and authoritarian. It can come across as if one must decide whether to live a life according
to science or Christianity.
The National Academy of Sciences published the following statement in 1981 seeking to build
a wall between science and religion, "Religion and science are separate and mutually exclusive realms of human thought whose
presentation in the same context leads to misunderstanding in both scientific theory and religious belief."
However, in recent years, science has begun to open the door to religion once again. The Smithsonian,
Harvard, and other institutions have in recent years brought physicists and theologians together for symposia. Linking spirituality
and science is in fashion once again.
The dialogue is largely confined to physics, which is not surprising as recent work in quantum
physics has physicists sounding like theologians anyway. For example, physicists found that to study an object changes the
object and therefore the study. At a simple level this means that shining a light onto something to aid observation will change
the behavior of the thing observed, whether it is an animal or subatomic particles.
Problems in observation causing change led noted scientist Werner Heisenberg to state, "The
common division of the world into subject and object, inner world and outer world, body and soul is no longer adequate."
Is a scientist really discussing the interconnectedness of body and soul? What's going on
here? Scientists have found that they are positing reality on planes of existence, which cannot be proven by scientific method.
This makes it increasingly difficult for scientists, who are honest with themselves, to throw stones at religious belief.
Setting aside the dramatic twists and turns in Angels & Demons, is there a way for science
and religion to peacefully coexist? I believe that science and religion promote different ways of viewing the world. Science
looks into the question "how" while religion is most often concerned with "Why?" But I don't think it is so simple. People
of faith have no reason not to wonder how, while scientists often push forward their understandings of the world by asking
why.
Science is really about method. The scientific method tests ideas by observation and repeatable
experiments. Noted preacher and author Barbara Brown Taylor suggests the difference is that science is based on observation,
while religion is based on revelation. As humans, we initiate the observation, while revelation is given to us by God through
the Holy Spirit. I think this distinction is helpful. There is no reason to dispense of either. But neither should they try
to be fully reconciled.
And there is no reason to get all excited when science seems to confirm our faith or very
upset when science seems to contradict our faith. Science and religion are separate lines of inquiry into the same reality
and as one character said in the film, "There are simply some things science is too young to understand." On the other hand
faith has not always shown the maturity that comes with age. Both our science and our faith are on a journey to a goal not
yet reached, and we should let each run its course with the occasional check and balance from each other.
Albert Einstein is often quoted weighing in on this issue saying, "Science without religion
is lame; religion without science is blind." Discoveries from science can help illumine our faith. Likewise, a breakthrough
in spirituality can help a scientist find new meaning in her or his work. These checks and balances become even more important
as genetic research pushes ahead to new frontiers in what is possible. Some on the faith side currently choose to ignore any
scientific discovery that seems to contradict their current understanding. I suggest that we neither ignore science nor place
our faith in it.
I personally would not choose to give up all the advancements in medicine to return to a pre-enlightenment
health care system. However, I would also hate to see science pushed ahead toward doing whatever is possible, without asking
whether something should be done. Therefore, while I suggest that the worlds of science and religion are largely separate,
they need each other.
After all, humans seem hard-wired to ask the big questions like, "Why am I here?" and, "How
did everything we see get here?" Science has shown that the more we understand, the muddier the water gets for the bigger
questions. Scientific method alone can never answer these questions adequately.
Open your mind to revelation and see if God does not enter in to make more sense out of what
you perceive through observation. Because, to really pursue meaning and purpose, you must move beyond the limits of science
to spiritual experience that cannot be proven through scientific method.
