Showing posts with label church. Show all posts
Showing posts with label church. Show all posts

Thursday, December 29, 2011

Science & Religion

My study of history long ago led me to conclude that Christianity and Western Civilization are inseparably intertwined. One particular aspect of that is the relationship between science and the Catholic Church. One of the long-standing myths about the Church, practically set in stone since the Church's missteps with Galileo, is that the Church has been "anti-science." That actually was the exception to the rule, both in history and today - as Pope Benedict XVI made clear last year in his discussion of the big bang theory. The Church has long been a driving force in education and science throughout history. That point is reinforced by Thomas Woods, writing at the Free Lance - Star:

The first person to measure the rate of acceleration of a freely falling body was Father Giambattista Riccioli. The man who has been called the father of Egyptology was Father Athanasius Kircher. Father Roger Boscovich, who has been described as "the greatest genius that Yugoslavia ever produced," has often been called the father of modern atomic theory. In the sciences it was the Jesuits in particular who distinguished themselves; some 35 craters on the moon, in fact, are named after Jesuit scientists and mathematicians.

By the 18th century, writes historian Jonathan Wright, the Jesuits "had contributed to the development of pendulum clocks, pantographs, barometers, reflecting telescopes, and microscopes, to scientific fields as various as magnetism, optics, and electricity. They observed, in some cases before anyone else, the colored bands on Jupiter's surface, the Andromeda nebula, and Saturn's rings. They theorized about the circulation of the blood (independently of Harvey), the theoretical possibility of flight, the way the moon affected the tides, and the wave-like nature of light."

Their achievements likewise included "star maps of the southern hemisphere, symbolic logic, flood-control measures on the Po and Adige rivers, introducing plus and minus signs into Italian mathematics."

These were the great opponents of human progress?

Seismology, the study of earthquakes, has been so dominated by Jesuits that it has become known as "the Jesuit science." It was a Jesuit, Father J.B. Macelwane, who wrote the first seismology textbook in America in 1936. To this day, the American Geophysical Union, which Macelwane once headed, gives an annual medal named after this brilliant priest to a promising young geophysicist.

The Jesuits were also the first to introduce Western science into such far-off places as China and India. In 17th-century China in particular, Jesuits introduced a substantial body of scientific knowledge and a vast array of mental tools for understanding the physical universe, including the Euclidean geometry that made planetary motion comprehensible.

Jesuits made important contributions to the scientific knowledge and infrastructure of other less developed nations not only in Asia but also in Africa and Central and South America. Beginning in the 19th century, these continents saw the opening of Jesuit observatories that studied such fields as astronomy, geomagnetism, meteorology, seismology and solar physics. Such observatories provided these places with accurate time keeping, weather forecasts (particularly important in the cases of hurricanes and typhoons), earthquake risk assessments and cartography.

The early church also institutionalized the care of widows, orphans, the sick and the poor in ways unseen in classical Greece or Rome. Even her harshest critics, from the fourth-century emperor Julian the Apostate all the way to Martin Luther and Voltaire, conceded the church's enormous contributions to the relief of human misery.

The spirit of Catholic charity — that we help those in need not out of any expectation of reciprocity, but as a pure gift, and that we even help those who might not like us — finds no analogue in classical Greece and Rome, but it is this idea of charity that we continue to embrace today.

The university was an utterly new phenomenon in European history. Nothing like it had existed in ancient Greece or Rome. The institution that we recognize today, with its faculties, courses of study, examinations and degrees, as well as the familiar distinction between undergraduate and graduate study, come to us directly from the medieval world.

By the time of the Reformation, no secular government had chartered more universities than the church. Edward Grant, who has written on medieval science for Cambridge University Press, points out that intellectual life was robust and debate was vigorous at these universities — the very opposite of the popular presumption.

It is no surprise that the church should have done so much to foster and protect the nascent university system, since the church, according to historian Lowrie Daly, "was the only institution in Europe that showed consistent interest in the preservation and cultivation of knowledge."

Until the mid-20th century, the history of economic thought started, more or less, with the 18th century and Adam Smith. But beginning with Joseph Schumpeter, the great economist and historian of his field, scholars have begun to point instead to the 16th-century Catholic theologians at Spain's University of Salamanca as the originators of modern economics.

And the list goes on. . . .

Read More...

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

Religion, the Constitution, & Judicial Activism


James Buckley, brother of William F. Buckley, has given an incredibly informative speech on the history of religion in America, our Constitution's provisions relating to religion, and the incredibly destructive decisions of activist courts to modify the Constitution according to their whim.
____________________________________________________________


The history of Western Civilization is, by and large, the history of religion. And indeed, Obama's claims to the contrary, the United States has been, since its inception, a Christian nation with room for all other religions. Judeo-Christian morality animated our nation from its earliest days and it is crystal clear that those who drafted the First Amendment firmly believed in a role for religion in all aspects of public life. The words "a wall between Church and State" do not appear in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, nor is there any evidence that our Founders ever pondered such a radical secularization of our government. Those words were read into the Constitution by judicial activists nearly half a century ago.

Our First Amendment essentially outlawed religious discrimination or the establishment of a state sponsored Church. But, as to non-demoninational promotion of religion generally, our Constitution is silent and, indeed, any study of American life at the time of the founding will find religion firmly ensconced in our public sector.

I could wax long on this - and the incredibly misguided and activist decision to remove religion from public life - but James Buckley, brother of William F,, captures my thoughts perfectly in a must-read speech reproduced at Plum Bob Blog. It is a long speech, but very much well worth the read. Here are some excerpts:

. . . I think it useful, at this point, to note that the idea that religion is a purely private matter is of recent vintage. For most of our history, the First Amendment’s provision prohibiting the “establishment of religion” was understood to do no more than forbid the federal government’s preferential treatment of a particular faith. But while the First Amendment’s purpose was to protect religion and the freedom of conscience from governmental interference, as Thomas Cooley noted in his 1871 treatise on Con­sti­tu­tional Limitations, the Framers considered it entirely appropriate for government “to foster religious worship and religious instruction, as conservators of the public morals and values, if not indispensable, assistants to the preservation of the public order.” As that perceptive observer of the American scene, Alexis de Tocqueville, put it, “while the law allows the American people to do everything, there are things which religion prevents them from imagining and forbids them to dare.”

And so it is not surprising that the Congress that adopted the First Amendment also reenacted the provision of the Northwest Ordinance which declares that “Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged;” and early Congresses proceeded to make grants of land to serve religious purposes and to fund sectarian education among the Indians.

In sum, as understood by those who wrote it, the First Amendment did not forbid the government from being biased in favor of religion as such so long as it championed none. Nor did it require that the state be insulated from religious principles and influences. The men at Philadelphia who outlawed religious tests for public service surely had the practical common sense to know, if some contemporary ideologues do not, that in those roles in which public servants are expected to bring their personal judgments to bear, the views of religious individuals will inevitably reflect their religious beliefs. It is, quite simply, fatuous to suppose that a public official can check the religious components of his convictions at the door before entering the council chambers of government.

. . . Three particularly sensitive lines of cases come to mind; namely, those in which, by narrow margins, the Supreme Court has virtually banished religion from public life, extended First Amendment protection to the most explicit pornography, and proclaimed what amounts to an unrestricted right to abortion. When, in 1957, the Court outlawed the recitation of voluntary non-denominational prayers in public schools, it ended a practice that had been part of the American experience since the outset of public education and which an overwhelming majority of American parents wished to have continued; and the net effect of its subsequent Establishment Clause decisions has been to exclude religion from almost every aspect of public life and to encourage the belief that religion is irrelevant to the public welfare. More than that, in Yale professor Stephen Carter’s words, it has led to “a discomfort and a disdain for religion in our public life that sometimes curdles into intolerance.”

. . . Whatever its cause, the undeniable fact is that we have witnessed an astonishing sea change in American practices and attitudes over the past forty years or so. Such words as “sin” and “honor” and “virtue” sound quaint as we discard moral precepts and codes of behavior that had been rooted in our society since the founding of the Republic. Moreover, we have shown a dismaying tendency to recast God in Man’s image. If enough people engage in conduct that society once condemned, we rewrite the rule book and assume that God, as a good democrat, will go along.

As a result, since the 1960s, we have witnessed an erosion of moral standards and self-discipline that have given us among the civilized world’s highest incidences of crime, abortion, pornography, drug abuse, and illegitimacy, as well as some corporate scandals of Olympian proportions. To cite just one striking statistic, in 1960, one out of twenty births in the United States was illegitimate; today, the figure is one out of three; and over the same period, we have also managed to create what Professor Carter has called a “culture of disbelief.”

It is hardly surprising, then, that there should have been a reaction to this culture of disbelief and to the loss of moral moorings that many attribute to it. . . .

Do read the entire speech. It is well worth your time.








Read More...

Sunday, December 23, 2007

From Iraq, A Christmas That Carries With It Hope

This message today from Rev Canon Andrew Whit, the Anglican Priest for Iraq, from his Church in Baghdad:

Yesterday, after I left my prefabricated hut in Baghdad's heavily fortified International Zone and made the journey of just one mile to St George's, the city's Anglican Church, I was greeted by more than 150 excited children.

"Abouna, Abouna," they cried, using the Arabic word for "Father". "This year we are going to have the best Christmas ever!"

I have to be escorted to my church by Iraqi Special Forces in armoured cars. As I took off my bulletproof clothes, I thought about the children's optimism.

St George's is still surrounded by razor wire and barricades to deflect bomb blasts. We cannot walk Baghdad's streets safely as we could in the days of Saddam and my parishioners tell me terrible stories of death and destruction, almost daily.

But the children are right. There is a sense in the air that things are slowly changing and this Christmas, for the first time in many years, will be a time of hope.

Last Christmas it was far too dangerous for us to hold our services in our church. We met, instead, in the prime minister's office. It may sound grand but for most of the time we had no electricity.

We managed to enjoy ourselves thanks, in part, to a pile of presents donated by an American church and brought to us by the US military.

. . . Life for everyone in Baghdad has been unbelievably difficult over the past five years. But now there are real signs of hope. I know things are changing for the better because my Iraqi congregation tells me so.

The most noticeable improvements are with the electricity supply and security. In summer, Baghdad got perhaps half an hour's electricity a day. Now it gets up to eight hours' supply.

And while this is still a deadly city, fewer people are being killed. The gunfire and explosions in the streets are lessening, as is the intimidation of my congregation.

We have streetlights for the first time in ages, which makes things seem safer and more normal.

With every corner shop that reopens for business, with every cafe-owner who serves coffee again, it is possible for us to start thinking positively once more.
And, at last, we are back in our church and we are looking forward to Christmas. My congregation is quite remarkable.

About 1,000 people come to our church – a fairly typical example of Thirties Church of England architecture set in a dusty Baghdad street.

None is an Anglican. They nominally belong to every possible denomination in Iraq – Syriac Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Presbyterian and others – but come to our church because they live nearby and it is too dangerous to travel.

. . . Last week we were able to hold a Christmas bazaar and it was a huge success. These are not normally part of an Iraqi Christmas, but all the women in our church now belong to the Mothers' Union and have learned of such events from the British-based organisation.

It was a small but significant step back to normality for a city where life continues to be, in so many ways, grim.

A visitor to the bazaar asked where all the men were. We have only six in our congregation. I responded in a matter-of-fact way: "Oh, most of them have been killed." I wasn't being blasé.

. . . [Christmas] is a time when they can celebrate life in all its fullness. It is about simple hope for the future.

There is much more. Read the article here.


Read More...