Science and Religion - Chapter 3 b (St. Luke of Simferopol)

Chapter 3 (a)

Chapter 3 (b) 

 

If we consider religion in its essence — that is, as an inner experience, as adoration of God and communion with Him — we must agree that science not only does not contradict religion, but, moreover, science leads to religion. If we do not limit ourselves to the painstaking collection of facts, like the learned specialist Wagner in Goethe's work, but, like Faust, give free rein to the entire human thirst for knowledge, which strives to comprehend the mysteries of existence and to possess these mysteries, then we will inevitably arrive at religion. And it is precisely science that proves its necessity. It poses the very same questions that religion answers. By the law of causality, science leads us to the First Cause of the world, and religion answers who is this creative First Cause not only of the world but also of man. It tells us that we descend from God (and not from apes). Science reveals the eternal Logos of being, which conditions this harmony. Science leads us to the need for some rational meaning in life, some higher purpose for life. Religion answers – it is GOD.

Science and Religion - Chapter 3 a (St. Luke of Simferopol)

Chapter 2

Chapter Three: Sources of Prejudice

Where does the widespread opinion among students, and educated people in general, that science contradicts religion come from?

Its cause lies in superficial knowledge in both science and religion, which confirms the idea: "Knowledge leads to God, half-knowledge leads away from Him." Half-knowledge is the scourge of our time: it is precisely this that creates the prejudice just mentioned. First, we know little about philosophy, especially the branch of philosophy that specifically addresses this issue — that is, epistemology, or the theory of knowledge.

By credulously accepting as scientific the evidence presented in support of the proposition that God does not exist, we forget the propositions already clarified by Kant that theoretical reason is equally powerless to prove or disprove the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, and free will. These objects and these questions are therefore called transcendental (beyond the bounds of science).

Science and Religion - Chapter 2 (St. Luke of Simferopol)

Chapter 1

Chapter Two: What is Religion?

 

Broadly speaking, religion is the relationship to the Absolute, to That Which we call God. Since this relationship exists for everyone, even for an atheist, it is common to say that everyone has their own religion. However, when taken in this manner, in a broad sense, religion can be both correct and incorrect, true and false, moral and immoral – depending on what we understand as the absolute, highest, and ultimate value of the world and how we relate to it – what we believe in and how we believe, what we accept and what we reject. Positively and fundamentally speaking, religion is the communion with God (reunion). It is precisely about this religion that we must speak.

Science and Religion - Chapter 1 (St. Luke of Simferopol)

Science and Religion1 

By St. Luke, Archbishop of Simferopol and All Crimea

Preface

In our life journey, we encounter two types of people. Some deny religion in the name of science, while others are distrustful of science for the sake of religion. There are also those who have managed to find harmony between these two needs of the human spirit. Shouldn't such harmony be the norm that a person ought to strive for? After all, both needs are rooted in the depths of human nature. Is it not the crisis of the educated individual that their "mind is not in accord with the heart"? Is it not this one-sided "intellectualism" that has driven a wedge between the intelligentsia and the people in Russia? Furthermore, the very fact that atheism and anti-Christianity are being presented to the public under the banner of science, which supposedly long ago disproved religion, compels us to deeply reflect and thoroughly resolve the question: does science contradict religion?

Chapter One: What is Science?

Socrates taught that in order to draw correct conclusions we must be able to define concepts. Therefore, we will try to give precise definitions of both concepts under consideration – and then compare them. Science is a system of acquired knowledge about the phenomena of reality that we observe. Let us delve into each of these words. Science is a system, meaning it is not a random collection of knowledge, but a coherent, ordered combination. This is achieved through classification, which is the distribution of homogeneous data into groups and generalizations – that is, the establishment of those common formulas and laws to which nature conforms. Science encompasses the knowledge that has been attained, meaning not all knowledge, but only that which has thus far been achieved. Scientific activity is dynamic; it is a process of "creating truth through experience and reasoning." This process in science is something that is dynamic and becoming: it undergoes questions, searches, doubts, and hypotheses, which may later turn out to be false. Only knowledge, that is, genuine reflections of reality, constitutes the established, static content of science — knowledge that is proven, universally binding, widely recognized, and objective judgments that are substantiated both logically and empirically, through reasoning and experience. This is knowledge about phenomena, that is, manifestations of life and nature, but not about their essences (phenomena, not noumena), about the world as we see it, observe it, but not about the world as it exists in itself, in essence. Phenomena are those elements that are evident to our five senses (as it is commonly believed, although there are more), for our five-sensory logic, armed with the technical enhancements of our cognitive organs in the form of microscopes, telescopes, and other scientific instruments. Thus, the field of exact science is limited just as the organs of scientific cognition are limited in their capacity for understanding.

But man wants and must know what lies beyond science, what has not yet been achieved by it, and, by its very nature, lies outside its boundaries. For example, psychology is the science of mental phenomena. Yet we want to know more; we want to understand the soul, because all of life consists of encounters and interactions of human souls, and the soul is the person itself. It would be strange to assert that science knows or can know all of existence. "There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy," says Hamlet in Shakespeare. Meanwhile, we also wish to comprehend this transcendental aspect; we seek to resolve the questions that so fill the soul of Heine's youth: "What is the mystery from ages past? And what is the essence of humanity? Where does one come from, where is one going? And who is there, above, beyond the stars?"2 Knowledge transcends science. It is attained through those higher abilities of the spirit that science does not possess. Primarily, this is intuition, that is, the immediate sense of truth, which anticipates, perceives, and prophetically foresees what lies beyond the reach of scientific methods of cognition. This intuition has increasingly captured the attention of philosophy in recent times. We live by it much more than we assume. It leads us into another, higher realm of the spirit – namely, into religion.

Notes:

1. Written in 1954. During the life of the Saint, the book was not published and was published for the first time only in 2000.

2. "The North Sea" by Heinrich Heine (1797–1856).

Chapter 2

 

Homily Concerning Those Who Consider Science Incompatible With Religion (St. Luke of Simferopol)

Homily on Science and Religion

By St. Luke, Archbishop of Simferopol and All Crimea

(Delivered on May 30, 1948)

 

"Considering modern science, as it was developed by Lamarck and Darwin, we find a direct opposite, an absolute inconsistency between the statements of science and the statements of religion in the field of basic questions of being and cognition. Therefore, an enlightened and consistent mind cannot recognize both at the same time. He needs to make a choice."

So wrote 65 years ago the famous German zoologist Haeckel, an ardent admirer of Darwin, in his then sensational book "The Riddle of the Universe", which, as it seemed, completely refuted religion. He says that all enlightened minds must choose between science and religion, reject one or the other. He considers it necessary to reject religion, for the enlightened minds of science will not be rejected.

When St. Luke the Surgeon Was Asked in Court About Believing in a God He Couldn't See

St. Luke the Surgeon performing surgery.

In the summer of 1921, wounded and burned Red Army men were brought from Bukhara to Tashkent. Within a few days of travel, in hot weather, many of them had colonies of fly larvae under their uniforms. They were delivered to the hospital at the end of the working day, when only the doctor on duty remained in the hospital. He examined only a few patients whose condition was causing concern. The rest were left to be.

By morning among the patients of the clinic, there was a rumor that doctors allowed wounded soldiers to be infected with worms. The Emergency Investigation Commission arrested all the doctors. A quick revolutionary court began, to which experts from other medical institutions in Tashkent were invited, including Professor Voyno-Yasenetsky (St. Luke).

Saint Luke of Crimea and Albert Schweitzer: Bringing Together Two Great Men

Saint Luke of Crimea and Albert Schweitzer:
Bringing Together Two Great Men

By George Papageorgiou

Saint Luke of Crimea and Albert Schweitzer are two great figures who marked the 20th century with their presence. One of them exposed himself to illnesses and had a hard life working in the tropics, while the other worked in the freezing cold of Siberia, facing endless exiles and prison due to a totally atheistic regime. They both practiced medicine without anything to gain, either using modern means whenever possible, or using basic and quite primitive means whenever it was necessary. The combination of their Christian faith and medical knowledge revealed another form of love for people through their work. Although they belong to different worlds, they are united by the love they had for less fortunate people and by their eagerness to help others in need.

Read the Introduction to the book and place your order here.

Saint Luke the Physician and His Contribution as a Surgeon

By John Sanidopoulos

St. Luke the Physician was born Valentin Felixovich Voyno-Yasenetsky in 1877. He was an outstanding surgeon, the founder of purulent surgery, a spiritual writer, a bishop of the Russian Orthodox Church, and the archbishop of Simferopol and of the Crimea since May 1946. In the year 1898, he began his studies at the Medical School of the University of Kiev. He was a laureate of the Stalin Prize in medicine in 1946. His repose was in 1961.

His contribution to local anesthesia was huge, using in general anesthesia chloroform and ether. Very often it is said that local anesthesia is much more dangerous than surgery itself. But St. Luke was an advanced personality, and always used a photographic camera to photograph all the incidents he operated on.

St. Luke used to say that to perform a surgery, you must have the eye of an eagle, the heart of a lion and the hands of a woman, thus describing the precision a surgeon should have.

On Science and Religion (St. Luke of Simferopol)

By St. Luke the Surgeon, Archbishop of Simferopol (1877-1961)

"When we examine contemporary science as developed by scientists such as Lamarck and Darwin, we see the antithesis and I would say the complete disagreement that exists between science and religion, on topics that concern the more basic problems of existence and knowledge. For this, an enlightened mind cannot accept at the same time both one and the other and must choose between religion and science."

A well known German Zoologist, Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919), who was a good follower of Darwin, wrote these words some 65 years ago in his book The Riddle of the Universe, that was very successful and, as it seemed, had proved that faith is absurd. So says Haeckel, that every enlightened man must choose between science and religion and should follow either one or the other. He considered it necessary that such men should deny religion because a logical man cannot deny science.