A MEETING OF RELIGION AND SCIENCE
By Th. Sumartana
1,205 words
18 February 1997
Jakarta Post
4
English
(c) 1997 The Jakarta Post
YOGYAKARTA (JP): In his book One World, The Interaction of
Science and Theology (Princeton 1986), John Polkinghorne raised
several interesting points. Science and theology share many
common things, such as scrutinizing aspects of reality. Away
from this perspective, a discussion about the two might be
productive. Misrepresentations are openly debated in both
issues even though theology does not believe that God is a
"tentative hypothesis".
In theology, the "ultimate concern" should be ethics
and a criteria for human behavior should be found. This should
not be restricted to men, but should include nature as well.
However, theology is also a science that recognizes criticism
and is open for improvement. Polkinghorne also believes that
religion and science could be related on grounds of historical
assessment rather than logical evaluations. This will prove
that the two have been undergoing development and change.
Polkinghorne also says we once thought the basic constituents
of matter were atoms; then nuclei; then protons and neutrons;
then quarks and gluons; next - who knows what?
Each century is marked by a new theory related to the development
of physics. "Scientific theories are corrigible, but
the result is a tense grasp of a never completely comprehended
reality."
Theology is tied to God, an invisible God. Polkinghorne said:
"Theology, like science, is corrigible. There is nothing
immutable in its pronouncements... every image of God is an
idol which eventually has to be broken in the search for reality."
In other words, every dogmatic conception has been influenced
by a historical environment, a certain situation applied to
stress a religious commitment, or ethics. Symbolic signs and
metaphoric forms were the best and most suitable languages.
Nevertheless, symbols and metaphors could not wholly represent
reality.
In the "theological process" God was represented
as a logical concept that developed with time. God materialized
through an evolutionary process in the history of man and
throughout the creation of nature. This concept is different
from the classical version of the Greeks who saw God as an
unmovable perfection in eternity, separated from historical
development. Hence, the activities of the theologian are as
fallible and his theories as corrigible as those of any other
scientist and any other theory.
Theology should be an inspirational impulse of moral decisions
while every theological thought should be filled with ethical
strength reflecting life's reality.
Nobody would cut down a large kepuh tree in Bali. In Java,
nobody would think of damaging or replacing a large rock.
There is wisdom in these words. And if someone would try to
explain or look at it from a monistic view, he or she would
go down in polemics because he failed to grab the wisdom of
his grandfathers.
When all the trees were felled and all the stones flattened,
nature would mete out penalties such as in the form of floods.
Therefore, a new theological formulation was needed to understand
religious attitudes of our forebears. This explains the rise
of new styles as Panintheism, which appreciates the wisdom
of environmental care.
Use of monistic expressions in the past indicated the arrogant
stance of theologians. Panintheism would have been better
suited in expressing basic concern, which was proclaimed "dead"
in a material world. Monism is a prewar missionary term, which
served as a means to eliminate primitive beliefs of an animistic
nature. Monism was identical with fighting to subdue unconventional
tendencies in Eastern religions. This sort of theology was
molded in the colonial perspective.
It resembles theological arguments of the middle ages. Meanwhile,
a ruined environment destroying man's domain and continuance,
learned the "wisdom" of primitive beliefs. People
remembered their forebears' convincing foresight. Rationalizing
human egoism and a religious mandate to exploit nature resulted
in environmental devastation which had never taken place in
the history of mankind. It appears as if religion was alienated
as another part of nature, as if it had never been a part
of it. We might call it destructive dualism.
The church reacted in a childish manner in the case of Galileo
and Darwin because of the gap between science and religion.
Galileo said: "Nor is God less excellently revealed in
Nature's actions than in the sacred statements of the Bible."
This observation is more accepted today by theologians. Knowledge
and theories progressed in meaningful ways. In this way, the
formation of mental compartments which separated knowledge
from theology, will in all likelihood be shed as a passing
trend.
Sacerdotalism has been a large problem since the Middle Ages,
the governing system whereby priests and men of religion wielded
authority. Religious personalities wielded absolute power
and quietened anyone who opposed their interests. Suspicion
for science extended over a long period, starting with the
teachings of falsehoods like exclusive salvation. Total freedom
of opinion was also deficient.
Practical scientific steps were also hindered by the clergy
until the second half of the 19th century.
Servetus, who lived in Calvin's time (16th century), for instance,
was burnt alive because he said the land of Judea was arid,
and not at all a land overflowing with milk and honey as described
in the Bible. The science of anatomy was forbidden because
it opposed the doctrine of life after death. Chemistry was
regarded as a diabolic science, which was banned by the Pope
in 1317. These incidents put science and general freedom of
thought on the side of religion.
In the context of religion, science and heretic traits tend
to unite, both fighting orthodox forms. For this reason, freedom
of religion should become an integral part of freedom of thought
and science which is liberated from the powers of religion.
Science has been undergoing a period of enlightenment, as
should happen with religious ideas too. J.B. Bury pictured
them all in his book A History of Freedom Of Thought (London,
1957).
Albert Schweitzer was a thinker who reunited sectarian religious
tendencies with science. "Theologic" suspicion which
hinders science need not battle criticism about scientific
exploration.
I presume that Liek Wilardjo's objections are against the
concept of manunggaling kawulo lan Gusti which unites human
beings with nature and God, due to the theologian concept
he believes in. Monism, the scapegoat, is being crucified.
In my opinion, monism in a certain context could be the road
to salvation, and would at least save human beings from an
environmental catastrophe.
Albert Schweitzer did not only break the arrogance of scientists,
he also penetrated theology. He was not just an observer of
theology, he created ideas which grew into new concepts. We
should aim for balance between theological understanding and
knowledge.
Learning from the disasters in the Middle Ages, science and
religion should be liberated from narrow minded views and
doubtful devotion. Religion cannot be freed of its own nor
will it liberate. Quite the contrary, it is able to shackle
its followers.
I would also like to suggest that Erasmus' works be translated
in Indonesian. Desiderius Erasmus, despite his intellectual
struggles, would inspire a productive connection between religion,
knowledge and the freedom of thought. Enlightenment is needed
and it's time to spawn ideas.
The writer is director at the Institute for Inter-faith Dialog
in Indonesia, based in Yogyakarta.
Copyright 1997 The Jakarta Post.
 |
 |
|
|
