Science vs. Religion, Why the Battle?

creationThe other night I was watching a TV documentary on the ‘debate’ between intelligent design and evolution. The program captured the turmoil in 2005 that tore apart the community of Dover, Pennsylvania in a battle over teaching evolution in public schools. A pointless debate if ever I heard one.

The debate around creation and evolution did not begin in Dover, Pennsylvania. In part, we could trace it back to Rene Descartes, the 17th century French philosopher who is famous for his phrase “I think therefore I am”.

Descartes posited that all we could really know was in the mind and his legacy was a split between the physical world and the spiritual world. Prior to this type of thinking, people understood the supernatural to be more real than the physical space they inhabited.

The other split that began just before Descartes was the Protestant Reformation. The reformers who objected to the doctrines and structure of the Catholic Church held as their foundation principle that of sola scriptura – Bible alone. No longer would all of Christianity believe that the bible should be interpreted by the Church (which actually compiled the book) but rather it would become something that could allegedly be perfectly interpreted by anyone who wanted to read it.

This individualistic reading of the bible divorced from Sacred Tradition led to a literal fundamentalism among some of the Protestant denominations (and this is where the good people of Dover fit in).

These splits in the world of philosophy and religion contributed to the 18th century ‘Age of Enlightenment’ where the world was to finally cast off the infantile belief in God and see in a new era based on science and intellectual interchange. “God is dead” is a widely quoted statement that came out of that same period. (Never mind that some of the most foundational scientific discoveries were made by Catholic clergy!)

The end result has been that many, if not most, people in the modern world see a split between body and soul, faith and reason, scripture and tradition, science and God. These splits have seeped into the consciousness of many Catholics even though the Catholic Church has proclaimed over and over the unity of all these aspects.

Too many people now think that all Christianity is Protestant Fundamentalism. Too many Catholics disregard their faith because they think that they have to choose between science and religion.

The reality is, though, that science and faith are two sides of the one coin; they are both looking to discover the truth.

Science can do a great many things. Science is able able to clone sheep and grow embryos in petri dishes. What science is unable to do is consider whether or not these things should be done. Science does not consider the morality of its actions.

Similarly, faith can do a great many things. Faith is able to lead a person to understand their deepest desires and emotions for love and truth. Whereas science tells us what we are, faith tells us who we are. One cannot exist without the other.

When science tries to play God it oversteps its boundaries. When faith tries to play science it oversteps its boundaries.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church makes the point well,

“There can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth. Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God” (Paragraph 159).

Ahh, the joy of Catholicism: faith and reason! So if science tells me that the world is 3.7 billion years old, who am I to argue with that?! Even Pope John Paul II publicly stated that there was no in principle conflict between evolution and the doctrine of the faith, and he was not the first Pope to do that. Those who believe that the bible is a geology text book have gravely misunderstood the bible.

Someone needed to tell the folk of Dover that scientific evolution does not do away with the need for God. They would have done the school children a much better service to not set one against the other. I fear all they achieved was another generation that will reject religion because of a false dichotomy.

Bernard Toutounji

Bernard Toutounji

Bernard Toutounji is an Australian Catholic writer and speaker. He writes a fortnightly column called Foolish Wisdom (www.foolishwisdom.com) which examines afresh issues within news, culture or faith. One of Bernard’s favourite quotes comes from Edith Stein who said "All those who seek truth seek God whether this is clear to them or not". Bernard is married to Jane and they have two daughters.

Leave a Replay

5 thoughts on “Science vs. Religion, Why the Battle?”

  1. I wouldn’t blame the protestants for splitting with Rome – at that time the Pope used his power to confirm an “arranged marriage” between two children under 18.
    Is it right for the Pope to associate with “forced marriage” ? I am talking about Henry 8 .
    I rather see the protestants helping catholic to realize the mistake and damage they did to so many young people…

    1. What happened 500 years ago has been picked to the bone. The lessons
      learned are now being tested in the fire of Love. Heat something high
      enough and it will meld. Take it to the limit and it will blend – this is the
      ultimate fate of science and religion.

  2. I would goback further than Descartes on this. Prior to William of Ockham (an Englishman
    at Oxford) it was accepted that there was a causality proper to every created
    nature. William, however, claimed that it was by an arbitrary choice of God
    that things cause other things to happen. Thus, for example, gasoline burns not
    because it is a hydrocarbon but because of the will of God. This break between
    natures and their causality will become a dogma among the later British
    empiricists who came to believe that causality is a mental projection of our
    minds rather than a reality we discover. Science was too primitive at the time
    to debunk this nonsense before it became a dogma. The rest of the story is
    quite long, so I will stop here, but obviously without a clear notion of
    causality as an objective reality, arguments for God and his providence are
    unsustainable.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Sign up for our Newsletter

Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit