Science is in the DNA of our Orthodox Faith

 By Archimandrite Iakovos Kanakis

The relationship between Faith, Theology and Science is clarified early on, already from the Biblical texts. From Genesis, the first book of the Bible, it is clear that God created the world. How the world was created, however, is left to the reader to answer over time. It is as if God scattered His "breadcrumbs" throughout creation and called man, the "expert", to discover them. And indeed, man gradually discovered much. With wisdom, from above and beyond, he found cures for diseases, developed technology and thus made human life easier. In fact, his life expectancy increased. Today, there are even remote surgeries and so many other similar things. God has blessed science and scientists and we have so many benefits today. But the "problems" start when the roles get confused. When the scientist does not see God "behind his achievements", when he acts arrogantly like a little god, and when the theologian, on the other hand, tries to place things "narrowly" by entering fields he does not know. The same thing happens when he constantly finds "demons" in front of him, flooded with suspicions.

An Orthodox Christian View of the Theory of Evolution

In a discussion after a lecture on Orthodox Psychotherapy on 14 July 2009 in Tbilisi, Georgia, Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos answered the following question from an attendee:

Question: What is your view of Darwin's theory of evolution? How did the world evolve?

Answer: This is a scientific theory that scientists study and on which they repeatedly express their views.

Scientific Progress as Related to Frankish Civilization and Romanity

By Fr. John Romanides

There are clear and distinct boundaries between Theology and Science. Theology, as the Greek origin of the word suggests, is concerned with God - what God is and how one can attain communion with Him - whereas Science is concerned with the created world and is interested mainly in the use of the world.

Medieval Frankish civilization* was destroyed by Europe's scientific, economic, social, political and philosophical awakening. Romanity however, was not only unharmed, but was actually reinforced by this awakening of Europe, and later of America and Russia.

Neo-Greeklings not only cannot perceive the above; rather, they are angered when they hear such a comment, because their basic dogma is that light can be found only in Europe or America or Russia. In fact, they believe that only the Greeks who accept this idea can become enlightened.

T.F. Torrance on Science and Theology

‘When the scientist inquires into the nature of the world, he does that not by looking at God but by looking away from him at the world, but when the theologian inquires into the nature of God as he has revealed himself he does that not by looking at the nature of the world, which God has created out of nothing, but by looking away from the world to its Creator. The scientist and the theologian thus move in opposite directions. The scientist is concerned with the created or contingent universe, so that he does not reckon God among the data with which natural science is concerned. And that is of course consonant with a proper theological understanding of the nature of the universe which God has created as a reality utterly different from himself but which he has endowed with a created rational order reflecting his own transcendent rationality.’ (T.F. Torrance, Preaching Christ Today: The Gospel and Scientific Thinking, 48-49)

Why Science Does Not Disprove God

Amir D. Aczel
Apr 27, 2014
TIME Magazine

A number of recent books and articles would have you believe that—somehow—science has now disproved the existence of God. We know so much about how the universe works, their authors claim, that God is simply unnecessary: we can explain all the workings of the universe without the need for a Creator.

And indeed, science has brought us an immense amount of understanding. The sum total of human knowledge doubles roughly every couple of years or less. In physics and cosmology, we can now claim to know what happened to our universe as early as a tiny fraction of a second after the Big Bang, something that may seem astounding. In chemistry, we understand the most complicated reactions among atoms and molecules, and in biology we know how the living cell works and have mapped out our entire genome. But does this vast knowledge base disprove the existence of some kind of pre-existent outside force that may have launched our universe on its way?

Orthodox Faith and the Natural Sciences

By Protopresbyter Fr. George Metallinos

1. In Orthodoxy, the antithesis – and the conflict – between faith (or theology) and science is not something self-evident. It is only a pseudo-problem, because Orthodoxy in its authentic expression and realization is likewise a science, however with a different cognitive subject.

Orthodox Theology is a science and in fact a positive science, because it has a cognitive subject and it also implements a scientific method. In Orthodox tradition, two kinds of cognition or wisdom are discernible (from the Apostle Paul, James the brother to Christ, through to Gregory Palamas and Eugenios Voulgaris etc.). There is the cognition of the Uncreated (God) and the cognition of the created (the world, as something fashioned or created). The cognition of God (“theognosy”) is supernatural and is attained through the synergy of man with God. The cognition of the world is natural and is acquired through scientific research. The method for attaining the cognition of the Divine is the “nepsis” (soberness) and “catharsis” (cleansing) of the heart (Psalm 50:12 and Matthew 5:8). Theology, therefore, is the gnosiology and the cognition of the Uncreated. Science is the gnosiology and the cognition of the created. In the science of faith, cognizance is called “theosis” (deification) and is the sole objective of Orthodoxy. All else is only the means to that end.

All That a Christian Should at Least Know About Creation

By St. Augustine of Hippo

When, then, the question is asked what we are to believe in regard to religion, it is not necessary to probe into the nature of things, as was done by those whom the Greeks call physici;* nor need we be in alarm lest the Christian should be ignorant of the force and number of the elements — the motion, and order, and eclipses of the heavenly bodies; the form of the heavens; the species and the natures of animals, plants, stones, fountains, rivers, mountains; about chronology and distances; the signs of coming storms; and a thousand other things which those philosophers either have found out, or think they have found out. For even these men themselves, endowed though they are with so much genius, burning with zeal, abounding in leisure, tracking some things by the aid of human conjecture, searching into others with the aids of history and experience, have not found out all things; and even their boasted discoveries are oftener mere guesses than certain knowledge.

Do the Saints Have Unerring Knowledge of Scientific Matters?

"The non-Christological interpretation of the Old Testament is not only deception, but also heresy."
 - Fr. John Romanides (1927-2001), Priest and Teacher of Theology

By Prof. Fr. John Romanides

When activated by the Holy Spirit the noetic faculty has unceasing memory of God in the Lord of Glory Who is Christ Incarnate. This is a state of liberation from demonic influences and unity in Christ in which the whole person, body and soul, is kept from error and gifted with inspiration in such wise that he does not confuse the energies of God with the energies of creatures and especially of the devil.

Patriarch Kirill of Russia: "It is naive to read Genesis as the textbook on anthropogenesis"

August 2, 2016

Interfax

Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia believes science and religion do not contradict each other, as they respond to different questions, and there is no sense in searching an answer to spiritual questions in works on Physics or Biology.

“We can say that science, religion and art are different ways of examining the world and man, of examining the world by man. Each of them has its own instruments, its own methods of learning. They respond to their own questions,” the primate said at his meeting with scientists in Sarov.

A Response to the Teaching of Saint Paisios on Evolution

By John Sanidopoulos

Like most teenagers of his time and even of the present, St. Paisios was taught about evolution in the context that either you believe in Darwinian evolution and reject God, or you accept God and reject evolution. In his own words, he explains this is what happened to him when he was fifteen years old, when a friend of his brother tried to dissuade the young Arsenios (this was his name prior to becoming a monastic) from the "nonsense" of prayer and fasting. Arsenios saw this as a temptation that he had to overcome (read more about this here). And indeed it was, since he was presented with various theories to dissuade him from faith in Christ. As a reward for remaining faithful, even at his young age he was made worthy of a vision of Christ immersed in divine light, confirming his faith.

Faith and Science: Contradictory or Complementary Meanings?

By Michael G. Houlis,

Theologian, Professor, Special Associate of the Holy Metropolis of Syros

Over the past few years, there has been an unnecessary return to essays and articles at the forefront of research, even by various positive scientists, on the old, misunderstood topic of the “enmity” between Science and Faith, or, Logic and Religion.

This phenomenon is being fuelled once again, mostly by representatives of the positive sciences, with quite a number of new and more heated books opposed to Christianity, but also by circles of the more conservative Protestants of America, who are opposed to the contemporary findings of Biology, Astronomy, Physics, etc. with their verbatim interpretation of the first Chapter of the Holy Bible (Genesis) and who are also against certain branches of Science with scientific and religious criteria.

We must make it clear from the very start, that Theology and Science do not oppose each other by nature, given that Science concerns itself with the structure and the functions of Nature, whereas Theology deals with God’s revealed truth and with the Holy-Spiritual meaning of Life. Science can answer questions about how the world and the universe are made, but it cannot of course answer the questions of who created the universe and why. These last questions are the business of Theology and by extension, of the Church. The great contemporary scientist Stephen Hawkins had stated that “even if science could manage to explain everything that happened from the birth of the universe to this day, it will not be able to explain why” (Focus magazine, vol.2, April 2000, p.80-84).

Orthodox Christianity and the Role of Science

By John Tachos

1. The Christian distinction between Science and Faith

In his homily on creation titled Hexaemeron (“On The Six Days”), where he analyzes the Old Testament narration of Creation, Basil the Great promptly stresses that the narration purposely lacks many details, in order to exercise and sharpen the readers’ minds, so that with the few details provided, they might seek out the rest (PG 29, 33B). He furthermore stresses (and this is more important) that, even if mankind discovers the way in which God created all things wonderful, it would in no way diminish our admiration of God’s grandeur.

Basil the Great here introduces two basic principles, as prerequisites for interpretation: (a) the freedom of scientific research, which is also an exercise of the mind and (b) the distinction between WHO made the world and HOW the world was made. In other words, it is one thing to theologically “know” that God created the world, and a totally different thing to “seek” the ways that all these wonders came to being. In the second instance, we acknowledge scientific “seeking” as the means to describe and analyze the data of all created things, and of course not the means to describe or analyze the uncreated divine energy.

The Three Hierarchs and Modern Atheism

By Metropolitan Euthymios (Stylios) of Achelous

(A sermon delivered to scientists in 1971)

"You boldly defeated heresies."

Introduction: The phenomenon of atheism appeared in the West and became a great and dangerous universal movement, which Western Civilization paid for dearly in the 20th century.

The phenomenon of atheism also appeared within the Western Church, as a reaction of scientists to the arbitrariness and cruelty of this Church (Holy Inquisition, etc.) In the East, however, there was never a problem in the relationship between scientists and the Church. And we owe our gratitude to the three great Hierarchs we celebrate today: Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian and John Chrysystom.

Faith And Science In Orthodox Gnosiology and Methodology

By Protopresbyter Fr. George Metallinos

A. Problem or pseudo-problem?

The antithesis and consequent collision between faith and science is a problem for western (Franco-Latin) thought and is a pseudo-problem for the Orthodox patristic tradition. This is based upon the historical data of these two regions.

The (supposed) dilemma of faith versus science appears in Western Europe in the 17th century with the simultaneous development of the positive sciences. About this same time we have the appearance of the first Orthodox positions on this issue. It is an important fact that these developments in the West are happening without the presence of Orthodoxy. In these recent centuries there has been a spiritual estrangement and differentiation between the [rational] West and the Orthodox East. This fact is outlined by the de-orthodoxiation and de-ecclesiastication of the western European world and the philosophication and legalization of faith and its eventual forming as a religion in the same area. Thus religion is the refutation of Orthodoxy and, according to Fr. John Romanides, the sickess of the human being. Therefore, Orthodoxy remained historically as a non-participant in the making of the present western European civilization, which is also a different size than the civilization of the Orthodox East.

On God and Science

Hearing these two words, God and Science (or Religion and Reason), most people think there is a contrast. But is it true that everything that has to do with God (or religion) violates the discoveries and achievements of science (or reason)? Or perhaps the opposite is true, where science contradicts and denies religion?

Certainly from a historical point of view we can see how many times frictions occurred when there was an encounter between the two. Unfortunately, to the point where there were bloody persecutions (from institutional religion) or severe and fierce denial which also had hideous bloody endings (on behalf of science, including philosophical currents).

What of the Discovery of Water on Mars?

In a Q&A during a lecture at Rice University, "Has Science Buried God?," John Lennox, Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University, answers the question, "What of the discovery of water on Mars?" Listen to this clip to hear Dr. Lennox's response.

Galileo, Augustine and Vatican II

Could There Be Another Galileo Case?

Galileo, Augustine and Vatican II

Gregory W. Dawes

University of Otago, New Zealand

Introduction

[1] Few scholars of religion seem familiar with the theological writings of one of the founders of modern science, Galileo Galilei (1564 - 1642). In these writings, which deal with the interpretation of the Bible, Galileo tries to defend his espousal of Copernican astronomy against his critics. He does so by drawing a sharp distinction between questions of religion and questions of science, justifying this by claiming that he stands in a long tradition, one reaching back at least as far as St. Augustine (354 - 430). Galileo's position ought to be of considerable contemporary interest, for in our own day his strategy has become a common one, particularly among those who wish to avoid what Andrew Dickson White famously described as "the warfare between science and theology." Such writers argue that science and religion do not come into conflict because their areas within which they are competent differ. In the words of a recent work by evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould, science and religion may both claim authority, but their areas of authority represent "non-overlapping magisteria".

Q & A: Why Is There No Official Orthodox Position on the Issue of Evolution and Origins?

I received the following important question in an email a few years back for which I have been given permission to reprint, along with my answer, below:

Question:

I am having difficulties with a particular issue; the issue of understanding Evolution and its place in the Eastern Orthodox Church today.

I am a "cradle" Orthodox and so my experience, through the Orthodox Church, on this topic has been that "Christ is not a decendant of monkeys/apes". I have been taught to be loyal to these matters and I have always considered it disrespectful to even want to consider Christ as an ape. In fact, Elder Paisios has boldly stated that it is "blasphemous" to think in this way (this comment can be found in his "Epistles"). I place much trust in these Saints and Elders of our Church, since I have also experienced their divine wisdom first hand and so this is the line of thinking I have comfortably adopted without questioning it using man's rational mind.

What I have come to understand is that our modern day Church is in fact divided on this matter. There are two groups, those who are compatabilist or those who are incompatabilist (cf. OrthodoxWiki for an explanation of terms).

Not dwelling on Patristics (since I am not a theologian), I can think of a modern day example of Father Seraphim Rose who holds the position of an incompatablist (ie. he does not support the idea that Christ is a descendant of a monkey).

My dilemma is, and what is eating me I suppose, why does the administrative Orthodox Church not hold a position on this matter when it is clear that many of our Saints do? Is there "room for everyone on this matter" (as a new convert boldly stated to me) when only one group can be right. In Orthodoxy (or even philosophy) there can only ever be One Truth so both groups can not be right and, like I mentioned I prefer to place my trust in divine revelation than man made proofs.

I understand from Scripture that, being challenged by the Pharisees as to whether he is from the devil or from God, that Christ announces that a house divided can not stand ... so then, why is our Orthodox church allowing itself to be divided on this topic please?

Further, for someone like myself, who places a huge trust and emphasis on the enlightened words of not just ordinary Orthodox but amazing saints like Elder Porphyrios ... am I sinning for standing up and defending Christ's image? I have been called an ideologist (which I am not).

I hope I make some sense, once upon a time the Church had no answers with regards to the Arian controversy and was divided. Then God revealed through miraculous means that there could only be "one truth" (on that matter) through miraculous means ... This topic for me IS a modern day controversy and though some people think - what does it have to do with salvation, I wonder how important it is to defend the "Tree of Life" from the "Tree of Death" (Darwinism and its variations).

Your thoughts are appreciated.

Answer:

Patristic Cosmology and Scientific Cosmology

By Vladimir Lossky

The cosmology of the Greek Fathers is necessarily expressed in terms of the conception of the universe which prevailed in their own age; a fact which takes nothing whatever away from the properly theological basis of their commentaries upon the Biblical narrative of the creation. The theology of the Orthodox Church, constantly soteriological in its emphasis, has never entered into alliance with philosophy in any attempt at a doctrinal synthesis: despite all its richness, the religious thought of the East has never had a scholasticism. If it does contain certain elements of Christian gnosis, as in the writings of St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Maximus, or in the Physical and Theological Chapters of St. Gregory Palamas, the speculation is always dominated by the central idea of union with God and never acquires the character of a system. Having no philosophical preferences, the Church always freely makes use of philosophy and the sciences for apologetic purposes, but she never has any cause to defend these relative and changing truths as she defends the unchangeable truth of her doctrines. This is why ancient or more modern cosmological theories cannot affect in any way the more fundamental truth which is revealed to the Church: 'the truth of Holy Scripture is far deeper than the limits of our understanding', as Philaret of Moscow says.1 In the face of the vision of the universe which the human race has gained since the period of the renaissance, in which the earth is represented as an atom lost in infinite space amid innumerable other worlds, there is no need for theology to change anything whatever in the narrative of Genesis; any more than it is its business to be concerned over the question of the salvation of the inhabitants of Mars. Revelation remains for theology essentially geocentric, for it is addressed to men and confers upon them the truth as it is relative to their salvation under the conditions which belong to the reality of life on earth. The Fathers saw in the parable of the Good Shepherd, coming down to seek one erring sheep from the mountains where he has left the remaining ninety-nine of his flock, an allusion to the smallness of the fallen world compared with the cosmos as a whole, and with the angelic aeons in particular.2

Scientific Progress, Frankish Civilization and Romanity

By Protopresbyter Fr. John Romanides

There are clear and distinct boundaries between Theology and Science. Theology, as the Greek origin of the word suggests, is concerned with God - what God is and how one can attain communion with Him - whereas Science is concerned with the created world and is interested mainly in the use of the world.