Natural science has become imperialistic in its attitude toward religion. Some scientists have self-designated themselves as theologians without saying so to the public. They’re under the false impression that science has superseded religion, when, in fact, Christian reflection is needed more than ever. We have come to the point of a deconstructed ethics and a barren, meaningless universe because of encroachment by a community who has worked outside its proper discipline. Let the theologians do theology; let the scientists do science. There is really no conflict between the two if each performs his duty toward his discipline. And, it should be emphasized that not all scientists have a negative view of Christian faith. It would be unfair to say so.
C.S. Lewis was very concerned about this very subject. His Narnia project dwells on this subject. (see Planet Narnia, Michael Ward) Ward observes that Lewis’ fascination with the medieval view of the universe is largely about his insistence that it is suffused with meaning, as opposed to a naturalistic explanation While modern views (Newton, Einstein) may be more accurate, they have turned the universe into a machine which, in Lewis’ view, it is not.
C. S. Lewis (again Ward) asserted in his book Miracles that the human mind represents not only biochemistry with its swirling atoms but participation in the cosmic logos. Human thought is a sharing in ‘supernatural reasoning,’ that is, our reasoning is dependent on Divine Reason.
Lewis thought both rationally and imaginatively. After the traumatic event of a debate at the Socratic Club with Elizabeth Anscombe where he felt that he had been bested, Lewis wrote The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe as a response in imaginative form defending his book Miracles. Imaginative literature conveys thought about God that rational discourse can not. In Narnia his apologetics take the form of a story. There he asserts the reality of divine presence. Anscombe reminded Lewis that rational argument is unable to convey the realities of spiritual experience.
Ward’s book should remind the apologist that rational argument has its limitations. Interestingly, this blog has mostly been rational argument with few stories. The future writing on this blog will give more time to what Ward says about the importance of story and metaphor in theological thinking.
Natural science does not determine the discipline of theology. While rational argument helps in a dialogue, story and metaphor are very much a part of any enfolding of theology’s concerns and truths.
Michael G. Tavella
October 1, 2024
