What's On
Menu
How do we encounter reality? And how do we come to an understanding of what reality is basically like? Whereas there is a tendency in some quarters to imagine that science and religion are locked in an age-old conflict, official Church teaching – and the experience of many, many professional scientists, suggests that faith and scientific reasoning can co-exist with, or even enrich, each other.
Nevertheless, the growth of scientific knowledge has undoubtedly raised some significant challenges for those who wish to integrate their scientific understanding of the world with their faith, or their ethical convictions. This course explores a few important points of contact in the rich, if sometimes troubled, relationship between science and religious thought. In particular, we will think about how we are supposed to learn what kind of reality we live in. Is scientific investigation the best way to answer this question? Or does scientific practice actually depend upon a certain view of reality – in which we expect the world to be ordered and intelligible?
Week 1
Science, theology and worldview
In one of her many books on the public reception of scientific ideas, the British philosopher Mary Midgley wrote: “Facts will never appear to us as brute and meaningless; they will always organise themselves into some sort of story, some drama.” Science and religion may well be different enterprises, as Stephen Jay Gould thought – but we have to find a way to integrate them, if we are to develop coherent worldviews. In this first session, we explore what wrote role science might play in the development of our worldviews, and what role our worldviews play in our understanding of science.
Week 2
Why “science vs. religion”?
The idea that there is an unavoidable conflict between science and religion is a pervasive one. Why is this? This session explores where the conflict – if there is one -between scientific rationality and religious belief really lies, and asks what the relationship between the two should look like. In particular, we look at the relationship between scientific explanation and belief in God.
Week 3
Divine action: miracles and the laws of nature
Perhaps the most obvious point of tension between scientific reasoning and theology is the idea of God’s action in the world. In Christian theology, there is no escaping the idea that God is active and present within the world, sometimes in miraculous ways. But does scientific rationality undermine the idea of a miracle (and viceversa)? And what does it mean to talk about God’s “action” in a world governed by natural laws, which are themselves created by God?
Week 4
Creation and evolution
The theory of evolution by natural selection presents some of the most serious and subtle challenges to Christian doctrine: if species evolve as a result of a “blind” natural process, how is this compatible with belief in creation by an intelligent God? And can traditional beliefs about humans being made in the image of God be made to cohere with the evolutionary picture, and the possibility that morality itself is a product of evolution?
Week 5
A test case: Resurrection
Finally, we look at a central Christian doctrine that presents very differently in an era dominated by scientific thinking: the resurrection of the body. How does our scientific understanding affect our attitude towards this doctrine? How should we approach this belief in the light of what we know about the human body, and the future of the cosmos?
Please listen to the audio recording, and look at the readings below if you have time.
Readings
Stephen Jay Gould, ‘Non-overlapping magisteria’, available at: https://caspar.bgsu.edu/~courses/4510/Classes/48A078B0-8402-4995-9161-A2C418612C75_files/Gould_97.pdf
The recent Tablet article by Theo Hawksley, also mentioned in the recording, is available with registration here: https://www.thetablet.co.uk/features/2/20950/faith-and-science-the-great-conversation-
In addition, the following interview with philosopher Mary Midgley is relevant, and may be of interest: https://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/research/2009/05/01/discussing-darwin (esp. pp. 13-16). You can download the pdf using the ‘download report’ button on the right of the screen.
Questions for reflection
1. Do you agree with Gould that the “net” of religion covers only question of moral meaning or value, and not questions of “fact”? Does Gould’s scheme resemble your own understanding of the difference between questions of fact and questions of meaning/value?
2. Hawksley claims that the work of trying to work out what our scientific understanding of the world has to do with our faith “rarely happens”. Is this true? What would it look like if it did happen?
3. What kind of role has science played in the formation of your own worldview, do you think?
Reading
John Polkinghorne, Reason and Reality (SPCK Classics) (ch. 6)
Questions for reflection
1. Polkinghorne discusses two ‘answers’ to the meta-questions that science raises, but cannot answer (pp. 76-80). The first concerns intelligibility – the puzzle that the universe should be intelligible at all. Do you find this to be puzzling?
2. The second concerns the so-called ‘anthropic principle’. Do you think that these kinds of considerations could help support the idea of a Creator? If so, why? If not, why not?
3. How do the two ‘answers’ above differ?
Reading
Arthur Peacocke, Paths from Science Towards God, ch. 5.
Optional reading
Lydia Jaeger, ‘How Creation Accounts for Divine Action in Nature’s World, in Faith and Philosophy’, available open-access at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy/vol29/iss3/4/
Questions for reflection
1. Peacocke suggests that the key problem is that of how to conceive of divine action when we also believe that natural laws are divinely created and upheld (p. 93). Do you find this to be a problem?
2. Peacocke suggests that the clash between the belief in miracles characteristic of “popular Christianity” and the “presumption in favour of intelligible, scientific explanations” is one reason why people “vote with their feet” and leave church (p. 94). What do you make of this suggestion? Is it important to find a way to bridge between these two presumptions?
3. Do you think that we should expect any scientific ideas to shed any light on the question of divine action? Do we need to find a better way to conceive of divine action?
Reading
John Haught, God after Darwin, ch. 6 (excerpt)
Mary Midgley, The Ethical Primate, ch. 12
Questions for reflection
1. Haugh takes up Teilhard’s suggestion that “a metaphysically adequate explanation of any universe in which evolution occurs requires [. . .] a transcendent force of attraction to explain the overarching tendency of matter to evolve toward life, mind and spirit.” (p. 90). What do you make of this suggestion?
2. Haught suggests that this “metaphysics of the future” is consonant with the biblical faith which “consists of the total orientation of consciences towards the coming of God, the ultimately real”. (p. 97). Does this description bear any resemblance to your own understanding of faith – and does it help to integrate evolutionary thought with your faith?
3. Midgley wants to see human ethical experience as being in continuity with the social traits found in other species – the “natural disposition to love and trust one another” (p. 131). How does this view of ethics compare to your own? Is the command to “love one another” something that, in humans, emerges from the (non-human) animal world? Are there any theological problems with this view?
No audio
Readings/resources
Paul Badham, ‘The meaning of the resurrection of Jesus’ in The Resurrection of Jesus Christ, ed. Paul Avis (Darton, Longman & Todd)
Brian D. Robinette, Grammars of Resurrection, ‘Introduction’ (excerpt)
James Alison, The Joy of Being Wrong, pp. 70-83 (available online: http://girardianlectionary.net/res/jbw_ch3bc.htm )
William Lane Craig, lecture on evidence for Jesus’ resurrection: https://www.bethinking.org/did-jesus-rise-from-the-dead/evidence-for-jesus-resurrection
Questions for reflection
1. What kind of role does belief in resurrection play in your own theological worldview? For example, is it the foundation for other beliefs; or, does it seem to follow from any other beliefs? Is it central, essential, subsidiary, optional, etc.?
2. Does the need to maintain a healthy relationship with scientific rationality(whatever that relationship looks like!) exert any pressure on your understanding of resurrection? What do you make of the idea of a purely ‘spiritual’ resurrection (see Badham)?
3. What do you believe, when/if you believe in the resurrection of Jesus? What do you believe, when/if you believe in the resurrection of the body?
4. Should the resurrection of Jesus be treated as something that could – in theory - be verified historically (Craig)? If so, why? If not, why not? Is it possible for us to relate to the resurrection of Jesus as a historical fact?
We would really appreciate it if you could take a few minutes to provide us with feedback on your experience with our course. Please complete an evaluation form here:
Evaluation form - Science, Religion and Reality · ChurchSuite Forms
Thank you so much for taking the time to respond to this request.
.jpg)
Stuart is the Theology Lead at LJC. He graduated with a degree in Literature and Theology from the University of Hull in 2000. From 2003-9 he studied Philosophical Theology part-time at the University of Nottingham, whilst continuing to work in the third sector with vulnerably-housed or homeless people, and young asylum seekers (as well as pulling pints in a pub). He was Lecturer at York St John University for almost a decade, before moving to London Jesuit Centre in 2021. He now lives in South East London, and spends as much time as he can in the woods.
