The Church and science, Part 5

In this post, we will discuss a specific issue in science today, and that is the environment.  We will use as a reference point the relatively recent encyclical, Laudato Si (Praise be to you, Lord), by our present Holy Father, Pope Francis, published in 2015. 

After reading through the encyclical, I have decided to split discussion of the environment into several parts.  I believe there are both beautiful insights, but also some concerns, with the material in this encyclical.  I will discuss the positive highlights from Chapters 1-3 in this post, and 4-6 in the next.  In the third post, (and maybe a 4^th) I will discuss some of the concerns I have with the document.   These posts will be very brief, very broad overviews of the document.  If you are seriously interested in this subject, I recommend reading the document in its entirety.

First off, the Holy Father quotes Saint John Paul II who said that man often sees, “no other meaning in their natural environment than what serves for immediate use and consumption.”  This is one of the themes of the encyclical; there is more to the environment than just it being for our use.  The environment reflects the beauty of God.   There is a quote in the Catechism, in paragraph 32, from Saint Augustine, which expounds on this point.  The Saint says, Question the beauty of the earth, question the beauty of the sea, question the beauty of the air distending and diffusing itself, question the beauty of the sky. . . question all these realities. All respond: "See, we are beautiful." Their beauty is a profession [confessio]. These beauties are subject to change. Who made them if not the Beautiful One [Pulcher] who is not subject to change?”     There is an intrinsic value to the environment that goes beyond utilitarian purposes.  We must see the beauty of it, and recognize its inherent dignity, that while not on the level of man, nonetheless demands a level of respect from us.

Francis then goes on and quotes his immediate successor, Pope Benedict XVI.  Benedict said that when creation is harmed “where we ourselves have the final word, where everything is simply our property and we use it for ourselves alone. The misuse of creation begins when we no longer recognize any higher instance than ourselves, when we see nothing else but ourselves”.  Again, Benedict XVI, like John Paul II before him, states the environment is harmed when we think of just humans alone, with no reference to God, or the rest of his creation. 

Next up, the Pope quotes his namesake, Saint Francis.   One of Francis’ spiritual children, Saint Bonaventure, said that Saint Francis “from a reflection on the primary source of all things, filled with even more abundant piety, he would call creatures, no matter how small, by the name of ‘brother’ or ‘sister’”.    This is most reflected in Francis’ Canticle of the Sun in which we find the following lines:

Be praised, my Lord, through all your creatures,
especially through my lord Brother Sun,
who brings the day; and you give light through him.
And he is beautiful and radiant in all his splendor!
Of you, Most High, he bears the likeness.

Praise be You, my Lord, through Sister Moon
and the stars, in heaven you formed them
clear and precious and beautiful.

Praised be You, my Lord, through Brother Wind,
and through the air, cloudy and serene,
and every kind of weather through which
You give sustenance to Your creatures.

Praised be You, my Lord, through Sister Water,
which is very useful and humble and precious and chaste.

Praised be You, my Lord, through Brother Fire,
through whom you light the night and he is beautiful
and playful and robust and strong.

Praised be You, my Lord, through Sister Mother Earth,
who sustains us and governs us and who produces
varied fruits with colored flowers and herbs.

Saint Francis indeed felt a kinship with all of God’s creation, and we should, too.


After speaking of the intrinsic value of the environment beyond a utilitarian use, the Holy Father mentions specific environmental issues we face.  He mentions pollution . Some forms of pollution are part of people’s daily experience. Exposure to atmospheric pollutants produces a broad spectrum of health hazards, especially for the poor, and causes millions of premature deaths. People take sick, for example, from breathing high levels of smoke from fuels used in cooking or heating. There is also pollution that affects everyone, caused by transport, industrial fumes, substances which contribute to the acidification of soil and water, fertilizers, insecticides, fungicides, herbicides and agrotoxins in general..  Account must also be taken of the pollution produced by residue, including dangerous waste present in different areas. Each year hundreds of millions of tons of waste are generated, much of it non-biodegradable, highly toxic and radioactive, from homes and businesses, from construction and demolition sites, from clinical, electronic and industrial sources.   We can all agree that pollution is something that needs to be controlled for us to live healthy lives.


He then discusses climate, and how it is something we all share a common concern for. The climate is a common good, belonging to all and meant for all. At the global level, it is a complex system linked to many of the essential conditions for human life.   He goes on to discuss concerns with the climate in contemporary culture, and we will discuss those in a bit more detail in a future post in this series.


He then discusses the issue of quality drinking water, something I have in fact devoted an entire post to.  http://jimscatholicblog.blogspot.com/2017/03/water-repost.html .  Fresh drinking water is an issue of primary importance, since it is indispensable for human life and for supporting terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Sources of fresh water are necessary for health care, agriculture and industry…access to safe drinkable water is a basic and universal human right, since it is essential to human survival and, as such, is a condition for the exercise of other human rights. Our world has a grave social debt towards the poor who lack access to drinking water, because they are denied the right to a life consistent with their inalienable dignity.   He discusses some of the concerns with its availability, especially among the poor.


The Holy Father then highlights the concerns many have about extinction of certain species, and certain ecosystems like rain forests.  Inequality in environmental resources between the rich and the poor are discussed.   While he never insists on one type of solution to these matters, he does forcefully condemn population control as a solution, which we did note in our recent series on that topic.


After laying out the environmental situation in the world today, the Holy Father turns to a theological discussion of the creation account.  We did discuss the creation account in that aforementioned series, but here, the Holy Father comes at it from a slightly different angle that while not denying that the creation story, and the Bible in general, exalt man above nature, it still demands we respect the environment and its inherent dignity.  Paragraph 67 is worth quoting in its entirety.   We are not God. The earth was here before us and it has been given to us. This allows us to respond to the charge that Judaeo-Christian thinking, on the basis of the Genesis account which grants man “dominion” over the earth (cf. Gen 1:28), has encouraged the unbridled exploitation of nature by painting him as domineering and destructive by nature. This is not a correct interpretation of the Bible as understood by the Church. Although it is true that we Christians have at times incorrectly interpreted the Scriptures, nowadays we must forcefully reject the notion that our being created in God’s image and given dominion over the earth justifies absolute domination over other creatures. The biblical texts are to be read in their context, with an appropriate hermeneutic, recognizing that they tell us to “till and keep” the garden of the world (cf. Gen 2:15). “Tilling” refers to cultivating, ploughing or working, while “keeping” means caring, protecting, overseeing and preserving. This implies a relationship of mutual responsibility between human beings and nature. Each community can take from the bounty of the earth whatever it needs for subsistence, but it also has the duty to protect the earth and to ensure its fruitfulness for coming generations. “The earth is the Lord’s” (Ps 24:1); to him belongs “the earth with all that is within it” (Dt 10:14). Thus God rejects every claim to absolute ownership: “The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine; for you are strangers and sojourners with me” (Lev 25:23).


He also speaks of the references to nature in the Psalms, which are prayed everyday by the Church. Again, we will quote a paragraph from the encyclical in its entirety, paragraph 72.  The Psalms frequently exhort us to praise God the Creator, “who spread out the earth on the waters, for his steadfast love endures for ever” (Ps 136:6). They also invite other creatures to join us in this praise: “Praise him, sun and moon, praise him, all you shining stars! Praise him, you highest heavens, and you waters above the heavens! Let them praise the name of the Lord, for he commanded and they were created” (Ps 148:3-5). We do not only exist by God’s mighty power; we also live with him and beside him. This is why we adore him.


The Holy Father does speak of a few other areas in the Bible where creation is exalted, but we shall move on to his summary here in paragraph 75:  A spirituality which forgets God as all-powerful and Creator is not acceptable. That is how we end up worshipping earthly powers, or ourselves usurping the place of God, even to the point of claiming an unlimited right to trample his creation underfoot. The best way to restore men and women to their rightful place, putting an end to their claim to absolute dominion over the earth, is to speak once more of the figure of a Father who creates and who alone owns the world. Otherwise, human beings will always try to impose their own laws and interests on reality.


Next, the Holy Father discusses the distinction between “creation” and “nature”.    He explains:  In the Judaeo-Christian tradition, the word “creation” has a broader meaning than “nature”, for it has to do with God’s loving plan in which every creature has its own value and significance. Nature is usually seen as a system which can be studied, understood and controlled, whereas creation can only be understood as a gift from the outstretched hand of the Father of all, and as a reality illuminated by the love which calls us together into universal communion…Judaeo-Christian thought demythologized nature. While continuing to admire its grandeur and immensity, it no longer saw nature as divine. In doing so, it emphasizes all the more our human responsibility for nature.  So nature, while a reflection of the divine, is not divine itself.   However, we are responsible for it.   And while man is superior to all creatures, even angels,  he adds, Our insistence that each human being is an image of God should not make us overlook the fact that each creature has its own purpose. None is superfluous. The entire material universe speaks of God’s love, his boundless affection for us. Soil, water, mountains: everything is, as it were, a caress of God.    We all have a common bond, and communion, with nature, that needs to be nurtured.  This common bond must include the poor and disadvantaged.


The Holy Father finishes his discussion of communion by mentioning that in Jesus, all of creation, including the natural world, is united.  First off, Jesus revealed a profound value for the natural world when he said things like “Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them” (Mt 6:26). Secondly, he was involved, as the Word of God, in the creation of the world.  “All things have been created though him and for him” (Col 1:16). Finally, in the Paschal Mystery, he has united all creation “For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross” (Col 1:19-20).  Jesus is the source and summit of the communion of all creation, which includes the natural world.

After this discussion of the theology of communion, the Holy Father then goes into a discussion of some things in the world that challenge that ideal.   He discusses technology.  He admits it has benefits, and has helped scientific progress in many ways.  However, he proposes that it often turns man and nature into an object.  The masters of technology are subjects who progressively gain control over these objects.  Man and nature become subjects of scientific inquiry first and foremost.  When one or the other is not needed, it is discarded, and more is sought to consume.  This is a technological paradigm that the Holy Father asks us to reconsider.  This paradigm leads to misguided thought: that we are the center of the universe, and nature has a merely utilitarian function as a fertile ground for technological growth, convenience takes place over absolutes, man’s employment is threatened as it is deemed worth less because robots and other forms of technology can do the job better than we can, and the inherent dignity and uniqueness of human labor is lost.


The Holy Father then touches on what we did in the first post in this series, and that is human intervention/experimentation on plants and animals.  He quotes what I did from the Catechism, and then says adds this: Here I would recall the balanced position of Saint John Paul II, who stressed the benefits of scientific and technological progress as evidence of “the nobility of the human vocation to participate responsibly in God’s creative action”, while also noting that “we cannot interfere in one area of the ecosystem without paying due attention to the consequences of such interference in other areas. He made it clear that the Church values the benefits which result “from the study and applications of molecular biology, supplemented by other disciplines such as genetics, and its technological application in agriculture and industry." But he also pointed out that this should not lead to “indiscriminate genetic manipulation which ignores the negative effects of such interventions. Human creativity cannot be suppressed. If an artist cannot be stopped from using his or her creativity, neither should those who possess particular gifts for the advancement of science and technology be prevented from using their God-given talents for the service of others. We need constantly to rethink the goals, effects, overall context and ethical limits of this human activity, which is a form of power involving considerable risks..  This, then, is the correct framework for any reflection concerning human intervention on plants and animals, which at present includes genetic manipulation by biotechnology for the sake of exploiting the potential present in material reality. The respect owed by faith to reason calls for close attention to what the biological sciences, through research uninfluenced by economic interests, can teach us about biological structures, their possibilities and their mutations. Any legitimate intervention will act on nature only in order “to favour its development in its own line, that of creation, as intended by God." Any intervention in nature should have the development of creation as its ultimate end, not the destruction of it, and again, by creation, that includes both man and nature.


So those are the noteworthy highlights as I see it from Chapters 1-3 of the encyclical.  In the next post, we will discuss highlights from Chapters 4-6, and then again afterwards, I will discuss some challenges and opportunities, as I see it, with the encyclical.


Joseph,  diligent protector of Christ, pray for us.

The Church and science, Part 4

So far in this series, we have been discussing science; how the Church views it, some of the key Catholic figures and moments in the history of science, and some evidence from the contemporary scene that the Church values and thinks highly of science.

Just why does the Church think highly of science?  Simply put, it is because the Church values reason. When one looks up the different definitions of science, the idea of it being a systematic study, or a systematic organization of knowledge come up.  For a system to work, it must be reasonable, or it will not function.  This is why the Church values science, because it is reasonable.  (Now there may be cases here and there where those practice or advocate something in the scientific field may not act or think reasonably, but I think all in the sciences would agree that should be the exception, and not the norm.)

Before we continue, I should point out here that for the purposes of this series, we have been referring to kind of a limited definition of science, namely the physical and natural sciences, those branches of study that focus on the natural world; the human body, the environment, animals, suns, the planet, etc.   However, in reality, there are other types of sciences besides the natural sciences, but we don’t typically think that way in our modern world.   There is the science of philosophy, which is the study of knowledge, reality, and existence in general.  There is the science of theology, which is the study of the nature of God.   These, however, can be considered science because they are indeed systematic, just like any good natural science is.   They have building blocks, and logically move from one level of discovery and truth to another, just like good natural science does.  However, we will continue, for our purposes here, to continue to imply the natural sciences when we speak of science.

So the Church values science because it is reasonable.  Why does the Church value reason?  In paragraph 159 of the Catechism, we read the following about the relationship between faith, reason, and science, "Though faith is above reason, 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. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are."  So since God is the author of both the natural and the supernatural world, it stands to reason (no pun intended) that scientific research and theology (the study of revealed truth) would lead to the same end and cause of all things, God.  Therefore, since it leads to God (when done in a morally appropriate way), science is valued by the Church.

The Catechism elaborates on the gift of reason further in paragraph 286.  “Human intelligence is surely already capable of finding a response to the question of origins. The existence of God the Creator can be known with certainty through his works, by the light of human reason, even if this knowledge is often obscured and disfigured by error. This is why faith comes to confirm and enlighten reason in the correct understanding of this truth: "By faith we understand that the world was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was made out of things which do not appear."   Faith can give us things that go beyond reason, such as the mystery of the Trinity (the second person of which was alluded to in the quote above, the word of God (Jesus, the Son of God).   However, faith will never reveal anything that goes against reason.  If faith were unreasonable, it would not be worthy of the supernatural gift of God that it is.  (For a refresher on the gift of faith, please see my post on it that I did on June 26 of last year,  http://jimscatholicblog.blogspot.com/2016/06/faith.html).

Saint John Paul II wrote a beautiful (although dense and heavy at times) encyclical on the relationship between faith and reason in 1998 entitled Fides et Ratio (Faith and Reason).  While this encyclical deals mostly with philosophy and theology, it does have a few things to say about science.   In one of its closing paragraphs, the Holy Father has this to say to scientists:  Finally, I cannot fail to address a word to scientists, whose research offers an ever greater knowledge of the universe as a whole and of the incredibly rich array of its component parts, animate and inanimate, with their complex atomic and molecular structures. So far has science come, especially in this century, that its achievements never cease to amaze us. In expressing my admiration and in offering encouragement to these brave pioneers of scientific research, to whom humanity owes so much of its current development, I would urge them to continue their efforts without ever abandoning the sapiential horizon within which scientific and technological achievements are wedded to the philosophical and ethical values which are the distinctive and indelible mark of the human person. Scientists are well aware that “the search for truth, even when it concerns a finite reality of the world or of man, is never-ending, but always points beyond to something higher than the immediate object of study, to the questions which give access to Mystery”  The Holy Father calls for science never to be an end in its own, but it must be at the service of man, something we have noted before.   It must be in communication with other forms of study; philosophy, morality, and theology most noteworthy.  I would also add it should be in communication with those who study economics, and sociology.  The world must seek to engage itself with the scientific community, but the scientific community must also realize it is just one cog in the overall breadth of knowledge, and not the end and purpose of all knowledge.

There was one further paragraph in the encyclical which I will note here that alludes to the error of this line of thought.  The Holy Father referred to something called scientism, distinct from scientific inquiry.   This is more a philosophy than a true science, and not a good philosophy at that.  Here is some of what he says about scientism: This is the philosophical notion which refuses to admit the validity of forms of knowledge other than those of the positive sciences; and it relegates religious, theological, ethical and aesthetic knowledge to the realm of mere fantasy…Science would thus be poised to dominate all aspects of human life through technological progress. The undeniable triumphs of scientific research and contemporary technology have helped to propagate a scientistic outlook, which now seems boundless, given its inroads into different cultures and the radical changes it has brought…Regrettably, it must be noted, scientism consigns all that has to do with the question of the meaning of life to the realm of the irrational or imaginary.   What the Holy Father is trying to say is that science, while valuable, has limits in terms of what it can tell us about the meaning and purpose of life, and to get at those areas, we need to go to other forms of knowledge like philosophy and theology.  Lines of thought like scientism, which deny those other areas outside science as valid, must therefore be condemned. 

There is one final quote from John Paul II that I would like to mention and this comes from a message to a 1987 conference held at the aforementioned (last post) Vatican Observatory.  He said,  Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish.  I don't think this quote speaks for itself, and does not needs any further explaining on my part.

Faith and reason work together to bring us to truth.  Since science seeks a reasonable explanation of things, it is of value to the Church, and the Church will never cease to uphold and promote the dignity of science, as long as it is carried out according to moral norms (which we discussed in post one of this series), and does not disengage from other branches of study (as we discussed here).   We have seen the evidence of the Church living out this reality of valuing science in the past (post two of this series), and in the present (post three).

With this post, we have now finished discussing science in general.  In the last two posts in this series, we will move from the general to the specific, and discuss two specific areas today where science and faith intersect that are causing controversy, and that is the topics of the environment, and the theory of evolution. 

Joseph most just, pray for us.

.

The Church and science, Part 3

In the last post, we discussed some notable people and developments in the history of Church and science.  In this post, we will focus on contemporary evidence of a respectful and fruitful relationship between the Church and science.

First off, there is the existence in Rome of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.  This was founded in 1936 by Pope Pius XI.   It draws on many of the world's leading scientists, including many Nobel Laureates, to act as advisors to the Popes on scientific issues. The Academy has an international membership which includes British physicist Stephen Hawking. 

Under the protection of the reigning Pope, the aim of the Academy is to promote the progress of the mathematical, physical and natural sciences and the study of related epistemological problems.  The statutes of 1976 express its goal: "The Pontifical Academy of Sciences has as its goal the promotion of the progress of the mathematical, physical, and natural sciences, and the study of related epistemological questions and issues."

The Academy and its membership are not to be influenced by factors of a national, political, or even religious character.  Learned people of good will, regardless of any religious affiliation, are able to be members.  Therefore, it represents a valuable source of objective scientific information which is made available to the Holy See and to the international scientific community.

Today the work of the Academy covers six main areas: fundamental science, the science and technology of global questions and issues, science in favor of the problems of the Third World, the ethics and politics of science, bioethics and epistemology.  The disciplines involved are sub-divided into eight fields: the disciplines of physics and related disciplines; astronomy; chemistry; the earth and environmental sciences; the life sciences (botany, agronomy, zoology, genetics, molecular biology, biochemistry, the neurosciences, surgery); mathematics; the applied sciences; and the philosophy and history of sciences.

Pope John Paul II had this to say about the Academy in 1979.  His words speak to the overall relationship of faith and science.  (I have bolded some of the more noteworthy passages.)

The existence of this Pontifical Academy of Sciences, of which in its ancient ancestry Galileo was a member and of which today eminent scientists are members, without any form of ethnic or religious discrimination, is a visible sign, raised amongst the peoples of the world, of the profound harmony that can exist between the truths of science and the truths of faith.... The Church of Rome together with all the Churches spread throughout the world attributes a great importance to the function of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. The title of 'Pontifical' given to the Academy means, as you know, the interest and the commitment of the Church, in different forms from the ancient patronage, but no less profound and effective in character.... How could the Church have lacked interest in the most noble of the occupations which are most strictly human – the search for truth?

Both believing scientists and non-believing scientists are involved in deciphering the palimpsest of nature which has been built in a rather complex way, where the traces of the different stages of the long evolution of the world have been covered over and mixed up. The believer, perhaps, has the advantage of knowing that the puzzle has a solution, that the underlying writing is in the final analysis the work of an intelligent being, and that thus the problem posed by nature has been posed to be solved and that its difficulty is without doubt proportionate to the present or future capacity of humanity. This, perhaps, will not give him new resources for the investigation engaged in. But it will contribute to maintaining him in that healthy optimism without which a sustained effort cannot be engaged in for long.

His successor, Pope Benedict XVI, had this to say to the Academy in 2012.  His entire comments are worth highlighting in my opinion!

Dialogue and cooperation between faith and science are urgently needed for building a culture that respects people and the planet... Without faith and science informing each other "the great questions of humanity leave the domain of reason and truth, and are abandoned to the irrational, to myth, or to indifference, with great damage to humanity itself, to world peace and to our ultimate destiny.... (As people strive to) unlock the mysteries of man and the universe, I am convinced of the urgent need for continued dialogue and cooperation between the worlds of science and of faith in building a culture of respect for man, for human dignity and freedom, for the future of our human family and for the long-term sustainable development of our planet.

Another example of the respect the Church has for science is the existence of the Vatican Observatory.   As we mentioned last post, the Church has a long history of interest in astronomy due to the astronomical basis on which the Church calendar is maintained.  This observatory is located 16 miles away from the Vatican, at Castel Gandolfo, where the Papal summer residence is located.  There is also an auxiliary station in Arizona.  Its current director is Brother Guy Consolmagno.  He is known as the “Pope’s astronomer”.  He became the first religious brother to be awarded the American Astronomical Society's Carl Sagan Medal for Excellence in Public Communication in Planetary Science in 2014. The judges described Consolmagno as "the voice of the juxtaposition of planetary science and astronomy with Christian belief, a rational spokesperson who can convey exceptionally well how religion and science can co-exist for believers.”  Consalmagno describes science as an "act of worship ... a way of getting close to creation, to really getting intimate with creation, and it's a way of getting intimate with the creator.”

The final evidence I will offer is all around us at our Catholic schools and universities.   Science is taught at all levels of Catholic education.  It is a requirement at many of her higher level institutions, even for non-majors.  I am sure many of you could name someone you know associated with science who is also a devout believer.  There are a few Catholic science teachers among my Facebook friends, and to you, I say thank you!

Hopefully, these posts so far have shown that the Church is in no way opposed to science. Science, really, should not see the Church or religion in general, as an adversary, and vice versa.  The world works best when there is mutual respect between the two.   Faith and reason must go together; if one or the other is absent, the individual, and therefore the world, is missing something precious.

We discussed in the first post what the Catechism has to say about science. We got a glimpse in this post, when discussing the Papal Academy, some Papal teaching regarding the relationship between faith and science.  In the next post, we will discuss in more detail Papal teaching throughout the years regarding faith, reason, and science.

The Church and science, Part 2

Continuing our series of reflections on the Church and science, we will focus this post on some of the history of the Church and science.  

During its earliest days, the persecuted Christian Church was noted for its tending to the sick and infirmed.  Priests were often also physicians.   Early Church fathers like St Benedict of Nursia and Clement of Alexandria emphasized medicine as an aid to the provision of hospitality.

After the fall of Rome, it was the monks who carried on the intellectual tradition of Western civilization.  This included study of the natural world.   There was religious motivation for this; for example, studying the stars and sun to determine times to pray, and when to celebrate certain feasts like Easter.  They also continued the study of medicine. 

This led later on to the establishment of schools and universities.  There were 50 Catholic universities in Europe by the mid-15^th century.   Roger Bacon was a Franciscan priest who studied at Oxford, and taught at the University of Paris.  He studied nature, and is considered to be the founder of the scientific method.  Georges Lemaitre was a priest and astronomer was the first to propose what is now known as the Big Bang Theory.   He taught physics at the Catholic University of Louvain.  He applied Einstein’s theory of relativity to cosmology.

Also at this time (the Middle Ages), great cathedrals were being built.  The beauty of these cathedrals was attributed in part to a great understanding of mathematics.     Rene Descartes, in addition to being a philosopher, is also considered the father of modern geometry.

During this time, the study of geology began to take root.   Georgius Agricola, a German catholic and scientist, is known as the father of mineralogy.  (One can see the origin of the word “agriculture” in his last name.)   Nicolas Steno was a Bishop who also studied the formation of rock layers and fossils which are still used today. 

The study of astronomy also owes a lot to the contribution of Catholics.   Based in large part on input from astronomers, at his request, Pope Gregory XIII introduced to the world the Gregorian calendar that is still used throughout the world today for measuring the year.  Nicolas Copernicus was an astronomer and priest was the first person to formulate a comprehensive heliocentric cosmology which displaced the Earth from the center of the universe.   He devoted his work where he explained this theory to Pope Paul III.

Decades after Copernicus, Galileo Galilei, also a Catholic scientist, came along and supported Copernicus’ theory.   He is known as the founder of modern science.  I am sure this name is familiar to most of you because of the controversy of him being condemned by the Church.  One could do an entire post on this case, but for now, suffice to say a few things.  1)  He was originally censured not for his heliocentric views, but rather, for his critical view of Scripture.  2)  He was condemned (incorrectly, yes) for his heliocentric views, after a lengthy review, but his reasons of support for his theory are still questioned today (even though the theory is not). 3) He was not tortured and the conditions of his imprisonment were rather benign. The Church has apologized for giving him a bad name during his time, and rehabilitated his name since then, but everything was not as bad as it is made out to be today.  Galileo never renounced his Catholic faith.

So we see here Catholics with a huge role in the founding of modern medicine, astronomy, geology, and mathematics!  Their schools and monasteries were especially centers for this.

Here are some other notable Catholic figures in the history of science.

Gregor Mendel was an Augustinian monk who discovered the basis for genetics.   Jesuit Athanasius Kircher was the first to propose that living beings enter and exist in the blood, an important development in the field of bacteriology.   Jean Fernel was a physician who introduced the term physiology.   Antoine Lavoisier was the founder of modern chemistry.  Francesco Grimaldi was a Jesuit who discovered the diffraction of light.  Hieronymus Fabricius is known as the father of embryology.  Hippolyte Fizeau was the first person to determine experimentally the velocity of light.   Johannes Guttenberg invented the printing press.   Rene Just Huay was a priest and father of crystallography.  Eduard Heis was an astronomer who contributed the first delineation of the Milky Way.  Jan Baptist van Helmont was the founder of pneumatic chemistry.   John Philip Holland developed the first submarine to be formally commissioned by the US Navy.   Rene Laennec was a physician who invented the stethoscope.  Louis Pasteur was the founder of bacteriology.  Giovanni Battista Riccioli was a Jesuit, and the first person to measure the acceleration due to gravity of falling bodies.   Louis Jacques Thenard discovered hydrogen peroxide.   Theodor Schwann was the founder of the theory of the cellular structure of modern organisms.   Francois Viete was the founder of modern algebra.   Alessandor Volta was a physicist known for the invention of the battery. 

Just google Catholic scientists and you can find many more!   These are just some of the more notable ones, in my opinion.  Perhaps this will wet your appetite, as it has mine, to look up these names, and others, and study their lives in more detail.

Hopefully, I have provided evidence that science owes a lot of its development to Catholics, and there is no way can one say, nor demonstrate with evidence, that Catholicism is opposed to science.   In fact, Catholicism is not opposed to anything that is true, as we hear in Sacred Scripture.  Finally, beloved, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about^[ these things (Philippians 4:8)

In the next post in this series, we will look at further evidence of this, but instead of looking into the past, we will look at our current times for such evidence.

Saint Joseph, model of artisans, and light of patriarchs, pray for us.

The Church and science, Part 1

Science has been in the news a lot lately, with various marches and demonstrations, based on feelings, perhaps, that science is being underappreciated these days by various people in power.  I figured this would be an opportunity to discuss what the Church teaches about science in general, a little bit about the historical relationship between Church and science, and then maybe get into discussions about specific areas and concerns where faith and science meet today.

I find it interesting that in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the paragraphs on science are in Part 3, Article 5, which discusses the Fifth Commandment,  “You shall not kill” (Exodus 20:4).   This is the same section that discusses the life issues (respect for life, self-defense, homicide, abortion, euthanasia, suicide, health).   Even though the Catechism came out in the mid-90’s, it still seems very relevant and noteworthy today that the discussion of science is placed in the section where respect for the life and dignity of human persons is likewise discussed.   Science cannot operate apart from respect for all human life. 

The first mention of science in the Catechism comes in Paragraph 2292: Scientific, medical, or psychological experiments on human individuals or groups can contribute to healing the sick and the advancement of public health.   It then continues in Paragraph 2293  Basic scientific research, as well as applied research, is a significant expression of man's dominion over creation. Science and technology are precious resources when placed at the service of man and promote his integral development for the benefit of all. By themselves however they cannot disclose the meaning of existence and of human progress. Science and technology are ordered to man, from whom they take their origin and development; hence they find in the person and in his moral values both evidence of their purpose and awareness of their limits.   So science is there for a purpose beyond itself.  It is not a goal.   God created the world for man (as we have discussed in previous posts), and therefore, science, which explores the universe, will do best when it is used at the service of man. 

In the next Paragraph (2294), we read: It is an illusion to claim moral neutrality in scientific research and its applications. On the other hand, guiding principles cannot be inferred from simple technical efficiency, or from the usefulness accruing to some at the expense of others or, even worse, from prevailing ideologies. Science and technology by their very nature require unconditional respect for fundamental moral criteria. They must be at the service of the human person, of his inalienable rights, of his true and integral good, in conformity with the plan and the will of God.   Like we said before, science must be at the service of man.   In order to do so, it requires a moral code to guide its actions.  Morality, contrary to what some may posit today, is not derived from science.   Morality guides science; science cannot determine morality.   And where does morality come from?  Philosophy and theology.   If there is corruption at any of those levels, science will suffer.  Good science requires good morality, which in turn requires good philosophy and theology.

In the next Paragraph (2295), the Church speaks specifically about experimentation involving human persons.  Research or experimentation on the human being cannot legitimate acts that are in themselves contrary to the dignity of persons and to the moral law. The subjects' potential consent does not justify such acts. Experimentation on human beings is not morally legitimate if it exposes the subject's life or physical and psychological integrity to disproportionate or avoidable risks. Experimentation on human beings does not conform to the dignity of the person if it takes place without the informed consent of the subject or those who legitimately speak for him.   The human person can never be an object for science.  The human person is rather, a subject.   The human person can never be regarded as simply utilitarian for something else.  Rather, it has its own dignity, coming from within, not without, and this comes first before anything else.

The final paragraph (2296) in this section discusses the issue of organ transplants.   Organ transplants are in conformity with the moral law if the physical and psychological dangers and risks to the donor are proportionate to the good sought for the recipient. Organ donation after death is a noble and meritorious act and is to be encouraged as an expression of generous solidarity. It is not morally acceptable if the donor or his proxy has not given explicit consent. Moreover, it is not morally admissible to bring about the disabling mutilation or death of a human being, even in order to delay the death of other persons.  This is a specific application of the principles we have discussed above.

So we can see in these few paragraphs here, the Church has tremendous respect for the potential of science in service of the human person.   I do realize that a lot of science does not necessarily deal directly with man, such as research on the environment, and/or on animals.   However, since, according to Genesis, man has dominion over creation, one can say that all science relates in some way to man.  Therefore, how we do it is, and the conclusions we draw from it, are very important.   It is important that scientific work continue, but that it not lose become unhinged from morality, and therefore, the human person.   The Church will continue to value science as it always has, and will encourage research and development that fit in her moral criteria.

In the next post, we will discuss some notable moments and persons in the history of the Church’s dealings in science.  Despite what some today might think, it is a great story to tell.

Joseph, protector of Holy Church, pray for us.