Rector’s Reflections
Friday 26th July 2024
Does there need to be a conflict between Science and Religion?
Over the last few days, we have seen that the answer to this question can be summed up in two words: “it depends”. It depends in part of what people understand by the word “Science”. There is no agreed definition of the word “Science” . It can refer to an area of study, but it can also refer to a methodology. Whether there is a conflict between Science and Religion also depends on how we understand God’s relationship to the physical world. For some theologians, God is never at work in the physical world; He is a bystander, standing outside the world of space, time and matter. Other theologians would say that while God is generally standing there on the sidelines, there might be the odd occasion when God decides to get involved in what is going on around us – for example, by answering a prayer or working a miracle. And finally there are those theologians who would argue that God is always at work in the physical world. And there is a final reason why there are differences of opinion on whether there needs to be a conflict between Science and Religion.
People take different approaches to the interpretation and use of the Bible. Can the Bible be used as a Scientific text, and if so, does this mean that the opening chapters of the book of Genesis can be treated as a Scientific account of the origin of the world and how humans came to be? I think the majority of Christians today would not treat the Bible as a Scientific textbook, but there are some who do. I should add that this is not a question about whether or not the Bible is “true”; it is a question about the nature of Biblical truth. It would be generally agreed among Christians that the Bible communicates theological, spiritual, ethical and historical truth; although some historians and archaeologists debate the accuracy and sufficiency of some of the historical accounts found within the Bible. But does the Bible also communicate “Scientific” truth?
The answer to this will depend in part on what we mean by the word “Scientific”, and how we apply what is a modern concept to a text produced several thousand years ago. The concept of “Science” and the adjective “Scientific” as they are used today have only become popular since the 19th Century; they are thus new comers to the way human beings think about their world. It might well be that a hundred years into the future, these terms have gone out of fashion, and no one uses the language of “Science” any more. Interestingly, the conceptual usefulness of the term “religion” goes back to Roman times, and so the term has proved much more long-lasting than the term “Science”. But who knows? Perhaps in due course the term “religion” will be replaced in general usage by the term “Spirituality”; the use of the concept of “Spirituality” is certainly increasing, although it is possible that this is merely a passing fad.
So what might one say by way of general conclusion? Here are three thoughts; there is of course so much more than can and should be said, but let me limit myself to these three thoughts.
To start with, is the question rightly posed? Should we really be thinking about whether there needs to be a conflict between Science and Spirituality? Is this the same question as whether there is a conflict between Science and Religion, or is it a fundamentally different sort of question with a fundamentally different sort of answer? In part, this depends on whether we choose to divorce “Spirituality” from “Religion”, and what we mean when we use the word “Spirituality”. For some, “Spirituality” is about a sense of awe and wonder, of mystery and deeper purpose. In this sense, an atheist Scientist can be profoundly “spiritual”.
This leads on to a second reflection. What do we think about God? How do we imagine God as He is in Himself, and how do we see Him at work in our world and in our own lives? How do we see God’s relationship to the world of time and matter? How do we see God’s relationship to the world of thought and Mind? Is God basically some sort of gigantic living being, with an invisible body? Or do we see God more in terms of the life of the Mind: God can be imagined as some sort of enormous Mind, coterminous with the Universe, and everything that exists, including ourselves, exists as thoughts within the Mind of God. There are no easy answers to these questions. But I think that whatever our own understanding of God, this understanding needs to make sense to us. It needs to make God real to us.
Finally, as Christians, there is the question of Jesus Christ. How does Jesus Christ fit into our understanding of the relationship between Science and Religion? Here again, there are different opinions. For some, the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, and His teaching, are basically irrelevant to most of the issues at stake in the relationship between Science and Religion. Jesus taught us how to live our lives; He did not teach us how to do Science. But is this true? Surely our Scientific work can be an expression and outworking of our commitment to Jesus? Certainly, Science can and perhaps ought to be an expression of our love for God and neighbour; but this is not always the case. Science can be used to destroy our fellow humans and the natural environment all around us.
So let me finish this current series with the following challenge: how do we use our engagement with the world of Science to give glory to God? It might be that our engagement with Science leads us to a deeper thankfulness for the wonders of Creation. It might be that we use our God-given skills of thought, imagination and creativity to try and solve some of the more challenging problems facing our world, for example in relation to Sustainability and Climate Change. Or it might be something completely different.
Science – however defined- is one of God’s greatest gifts to the human race. So, too, is Religion. Let us use both to His praise and His glory.