| Part ofa series on |
| Christian culture |
|---|
 |
| Christianity portal |
| Part ofa series on |
| Christianity |
|---|
 |
.JPG)
Most scientific and technical innovations prior to theScientific Revolution were achieved by societies organized by religious traditions. AncientChristian scholars pioneered individual elements of thescientific method. Historically, Christianity has been and still is a patron of sciences.[1] It has been prolific in the foundation of schools,universities and hospitals,[2][3][4][5][6] and many Christian clergy have been active in the sciences and have made significant contributions to the development of science.[7]
Historians of science such asPierre Duhem credit medieval Catholic mathematicians and philosophers such asJohn Buridan,Nicole Oresme andRoger Bacon as the founders of modern science.[8] Duhem concluded that "the mechanics and physics of which modern times are justifiably proud to proceed, by an uninterrupted series of scarcely perceptible improvements, from doctrines professed in the heart of the medieval schools".[9] Many of the most distinguished classical scholars in theByzantine Empire held high office in theEastern Orthodox Church.[10]Protestantism has had an important influence on science, according to theMerton Thesis, there was a positive correlation between the rise of EnglishPuritanism and GermanPietism on the one hand, and early experimental science on the other.[11]
Christian scholars and scientists have made noted contributions toscience andtechnology fields,[12][13][14] as well asmedicine,[15] both historically and in modern times.[16] Some scholars state that Christianity contributed to the rise of theScientific Revolution.[17][18][19][20] Between 1901 and 2001, about 56.5% ofNobel prize laureates in scientific fields wereChristians,[21] and 26% were ofJewish descent (includingJewish atheists).[21]
Events inChristian Europe, such as theGalileo affair, that were associated with theScientific Revolution and theAge of Enlightenment led some scholars such asJohn William Draper to postulate aconflict thesis, holding that religion and science have been in conflict throughout history. While the conflict thesis remains popular inatheistic and antireligious circles, it has lost favor among most contemporary historians of science.[22][23][24] Most contemporary historians of science believe the Galileo affair is an exception in the overall relationship between science and Christianity and have also corrected numerous false interpretations of this event.[25][26][27][28]
Most sources of knowledge available to theearly Christians were connected topagan worldviews as the early Christians largely lived among pagans. There were various opinions on how Christianity should regard pagan learning, which included its ideas about nature. For instance, among early Christian teachers, fromTertullian (c. 160–220) held a generally negative opinion ofGreek philosophy, whileOrigen (c. 185–254) regarded it much more favourably and required his students to read nearly every work available to them.[29]
Earlier attempts at reconciliation of Christianity withNewtonian mechanics appear quite different from later attempts at reconciliation with the newer scientific ideas ofevolution orrelativity.[30] Many early interpretations of evolution polarized themselves around astruggle for existence. These ideas were significantly countered by later findings of universalpatterns of biological cooperation. According toJohn Habgood, all man really knows here is that theuniverse seems to be a mix ofgood and evil,beauty andpain, and thatsuffering may somehow be part of the process of creation. Habgood holds that Christians should not be surprised that suffering may be used creatively byGod, given their faith in the symbol of theCross.[30]Robert John Russell has examined consonance and dissonance between modern physics, evolutionary biology, and Christian theology.[31][32]
Christian philosophersAugustine of Hippo (354–430) and Thomas Aquinas[33] held that scriptures can have multiple interpretations on certain areas where the matters were far beyond their reach, therefore one should leave room for future findings to shed light on the meanings. Augustine argued:
Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars ... Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking non-sense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of the faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men.[34]
The "Handmaiden" tradition, which saw secular studies of the universe as a very important and helpful part of arriving at a better understanding of scripture, was adopted throughout Christian history from early on.[35] Also, the sense that God created the world as a self-operating system is what motivated many Christians throughout the Middle Ages to investigate nature.[36]
TheByzantine Empire was one of the peaks inChristian history andChristian civilization, andConstantinople remained the leading city of theChristian world in size, wealth, and culture.There was a renewed interest in classical Greek philosophy, as well as an increase in literary output in vernacular Greek.[37] TheByzantine science played an important role in the transmission ofclassical knowledge to theIslamic world and toRenaissance Italy, and also in the transmission ofIslamic science to Renaissance Italy.[38][39] Many of the most distinguished classical scholars held high office in theEastern Orthodox Church.[40]
Modern historians of science such asJ.L. Heilbron,[41]Alistair Cameron Crombie,David Lindberg,[42]Edward Grant,Thomas Goldstein,[43] and Ted Davis have reviewed the popular notion that medieval Christianity was a negative influence in the development of civilization and science. In their views, not only did the monks save and cultivate the remnants of ancient civilization during the barbarian invasions, but the medieval church promoted learnings and science through its sponsorship of manyuniversities which, under its leadership, grew rapidly in Europe in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. St. Thomas Aquinas, the Church's "model theologian", not only argued that reason is in harmony with faith, he even recognized that reason can contribute to understanding revelation, and so encouraged intellectual development. He was not unlike other medieval theologians who sought out reason in the effort to defend his faith.[44] Some of today's scholars, such asStanley Jaki, have claimed that Christianity with its particularworldview, was a crucial factor for the emergence of modern science.[45] According to professorNoah J. Efron, virtually all modern scholars and historians agree that Christianity moved many early-modern intellectuals to study nature systematically.[46]
Physics teacher David Hutchings and intellectual historian James C. Ungureanu credit the central tenets of traditional Christianity for having been the greatest benefit to scientific thinking, while at the same time noting the irony of theconflict thesis:
And yet, as impossible as it might seem, bothConflict andWarfare are plagued by an even greater irony than that. It turns out that when they went after Christian doctrine for being the ultimate enemy of science, they were engaging in friendly fire. For, in actual fact, no other body of thought has ever been of greater benefit to scientific thinking than the central tenets of traditional Christianity have—in the whole of human history.[47]
— David Hutchings & James C. Ungureanu
David C. Lindberg states that the widespread popular belief that the Middle Ages was a time of ignorance and superstition due to the Christian church is a "caricature". According to Lindberg, while there are some portions of the classical tradition which suggest this view, these were exceptional cases. It was common to tolerate and encourage critical thinking about the nature of the world. The relation between Christianity and science is complex and cannot be simplified to either harmony[48] or conflict,[49] according to Lindberg.[50] Lindberg reports that "the late medieval scholar rarely experienced the coercive power of the church and would have regarded himself as free (particularly in the natural sciences) to follow reason and observation wherever they led. There was no warfare between science and the church."[51]Ted Peters inEncyclopedia of Religion writes that although there is some truth in the "Galileo's condemnation" story but through exaggerations, it has now become "a modern myth perpetuated by those wishing to see warfare between science and religion who were allegedly persecuted by an atavistic and dogma-bound ecclesiastical authority".[52] In 1992, theCatholic Church's seeming vindication of Galileo attracted much comment in themedia:
Generations of historians and sociologists have discovered many ways in which Christians, Christian beliefs, and Christian institutions played crucial roles in fashioning the tenets, methods, and institutions of what in time became modern science. They found that some forms of Christianity provided the motivation to study nature systematically.[53]
A degree of concord between science and religion can be seen in religious belief and empirical science. The belief that God created the world and therefore humans, can lead to the view that he arranged for humans to know the world. This is underwritten by the doctrine ofimago dei. In the words ofThomas Aquinas, "Since human beings are said to be in the image of God in virtue of their having a nature that includes an intellect, such a nature is most in the image of God in virtue of being most able to imitate God".[54]
During theEnlightenment, a period "characterized by dramatic revolutions in science" and the rise of Protestant challenges to the authority of the Catholic Church via individual liberty, the authority of Christian scriptures became strongly challenged. As science advanced, acceptance of a literal version of the Bible became "increasingly untenable" and some in that period presented ways of interpreting scripture according to its spirit on its authority and truth.[55]
Regarding the subject on the distribution of Nobel Prizes by religion between 1901 and 2000, the data taken from Baruch A. Shalev, shows that between the years 1901 and 2000 reveals that 654 Laureates belong to 28 different religion. 65.4% have identified Christianity in its various forms as their religious preference. Overall, Christians have won a total of 78.3% of all the Nobel Prizes in Peace, 72.5% in Chemistry, 65.3% in Physics, 62% in Medicine, 54% in Economics and 49.5% of all Literature awards.[56]
Between 1150 and 1200, Christian scholars had traveled to Sicily and Spain to retrieve the writings of Aristotle, which had been lost to the West after the Fall of the Roman Empire. This produced a period of cultural ferment that one "modern historian has called the twelfth century renaissance".[57]Thomas Aquinas responded by writing his monumental summas in support of human reason as compatible with faith.[58] Christian theology adapted to Aristotle's secular and humanistic natural philosophy.[59] By the Late Middle Ages, Aquinas's rationalism was being heatedly debated in the new universities.[60]William Ockham resolved the conflict by arguing that faith and reason should be pursued separately so that each could achieve its own end.[60] Historians of science David C. Lindberg, Ronald Numbers and Edward Grant have described what followed as a "medieval scientific revival".[59][61] Science historianNoah Efron has written that Christianity provided the early "tenets, methods, and institutions of what in time became modern science".[46]
Modernwestern universities have their origins directly in the Medieval Church.[62][63][64][65][66] They began ascathedral schools, and all students were considered clerics.[67] This was a benefit as it placed the students under ecclesiastical jurisdiction and thus imparted certain legal immunities and protections. The cathedral schools eventually became partially detached from the cathedrals and formed their own institutions, the earliest being theUniversity of Bologna (1088), theUniversity of Oxford (1096), and theUniversity of Paris (c. 1150).[68][69][70]
Some scholars have noted a direct tie between "particular aspects of traditional Christianity" and the rise of science.[18] Other scholars and historians have credited Christianity with laying the foundation for theScientific Revolution.[71] According toRobert K. Merton, the values of English Puritanism andGerman Pietism led to theScientific Revolution of the 17th and 18th centuries. (TheMerton Thesis is both widely accepted and disputed.) Merton explained that the connection betweenreligious affiliation and interest in science was the result of a significant synergy between theascetic Protestant values and those of modern science.[72][73]
At first, according toAndrew Dickson White's 1896 bookA History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, a biblical worldview affected negatively the progress of science through time. Dickinson also argues that immediately following theReformation matters were even worse. The interpretations of Scripture by Luther and Calvin became as sacred to their followers as the Scripture itself. For instance, whenGeorg Calixtus ventured, in interpreting the Psalms, to question the accepted belief that "the waters above the heavens" were contained in a vast receptacle upheld by a solid vault, he was bitterly denounced as heretical.[74] Today, much of the scholarship in which the conflict thesis was originally based is considered to be inaccurate. For instance, the claim that early Christians rejected scientific findings by the Greco-Romans is false, since the "handmaiden" view of secular studies was seen to shed light on theology. This view was widely adapted throughout the early medieval period and afterwards by theologians (such as Augustine) and ultimately resulted in fostering interest in knowledge about nature through time.[75] Also, the claim that people of theMiddle Ages widely believed that theEarth was flat was first propagated in the same period that originated the conflict thesis[76] and is still very common in popular culture. Modern scholars regard this claim as mistaken, as the contemporary historians of scienceDavid C. Lindberg andRonald L. Numbers write: "there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference."[76][77] From the fall of Rome to the time of Columbus, all major scholars and many vernacular writers interested in the physical shape of the Earth held a spherical view with the exception of Lactantius and Cosmas.[78]
H. Floris Cohen argued for a biblical Protestant, but not excluding Catholicism, influence on the early development of modern science.[79] He presented Dutch historianR. Hooykaas' argument that a biblical world-view holds all the necessary antidotes for the hubris of Greek rationalism: a respect for manual labour, leading to more experimentation andempiricism, and a supreme God that left nature and open to emulation and manipulation.[79] It supports the idea early modern science rose due to a combination of Greek and biblical thought.[80][81]
Oxford historianPeter Harrison is another who has argued that a Biblical worldview was significant for the development of modern science. Harrison contends that Protestant approaches to the book of scripture had significant, if largely unintended, consequences for the interpretation of the book of nature.[82][page needed] Harrison has also suggested that literal readings of the Genesis narratives of the Creation and Fall motivated and legitimated scientific activity in seventeenth-century England. For many of its seventeenth-century practitioners, science was imagined to be a means of restoring a human dominion over nature that had been lost as a consequence of the Fall.[83][page needed]
Historian and professor of religionEugene M. Klaaren holds that "a belief in divine creation" was central to an emergence of science in seventeenth-century England. The philosopherMichael Foster has published analytical philosophy connecting Christian doctrines of creation with empiricism. Historian William B. Ashworth has argued against the historical notion of distinctive mind-sets and the idea of Catholic and Protestant sciences.[84] Historians James R. Jacob and Margaret C. Jacob have argued for a linkage between seventeenth-centuryAnglican intellectual transformations and influential English scientists (e.g.,Robert Boyle andIsaac Newton).[85]John Dillenberger andChristopher B. Kaiser have written theological surveys, which also cover additional interactions occurring in the eighteenth, nineteenth, and twentieth centuries.[86][87] Philosopher of Religion, Richard Jones, has written a philosophical critique of the "dependency thesis" which assumes that modern science emerged from Christian sources and doctrines. Though he acknowledges that modern science emerged in a religious framework, that Christianity greatly elevated the importance of science by sanctioning and religiously legitimizing it in medieval period, and that Christianity created a favorable social context for it to grow; he argues that direct Christian beliefs or doctrines were not primary source of scientific pursuits by natural philosophers, nor was Christianity, in and of itself, exclusively or directly necessary in developing or practicing modern science.
Oxford University historian and theologianJohn Hedley Brooke wrote that "when natural philosophers referred tolaws of nature, they were not glibly choosing that metaphor. Laws were the result of legislation by an intelligent deity. Thus, the philosopherRené Descartes (1596–1650) insisted that he was discovering the "laws that God has put into nature." Later Newton would declare that the regulation of theSolar System presupposed the "counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being."[88] HistorianRonald L. Numbers stated that this thesis "received a boost" from mathematician and philosopherAlfred North Whitehead'sScience and the Modern World (1925). Numbers has also argued, "Despite the manifest shortcomings of the claim that Christianity gave birth to science—most glaringly, it ignores or minimizes the contributions of ancient Greeks and medieval Muslims—it too, refuses to succumb to the death it deserves."[89] The sociologistRodney Stark ofBaylor University, argued in contrast that "Christian theology was essential for the rise of science."[90]
InReconciling Science and Religion: The Debate in Early-twentieth-century Britain, historian of biologyPeter J. Bowler argues that in contrast to the conflicts between science and religion in the U.S. in the 1920s (most famously theScopes Trial), during this period Great Britain experienced a concerted effort at reconciliation, championed by intellectually conservative scientists, supported by liberal theologians but opposed by younger scientists and secularists andconservative Christians. These attempts at reconciliation fell apart in the 1930s due to increased social tensions, moves towardsneo-orthodox theology and the acceptance of themodern evolutionary synthesis.[91]
In the twentieth century, severalecumenical organizations promoting a harmony between science and Christianity were founded, most notably theAmerican Scientific Affiliation,The Biologos Foundation,Christians in Science,The Society of Ordained Scientists, andThe Veritas Forum.[92]
While refined and clarified over the centuries, theCatholic position on the relationship between science and religion is one of harmony and has maintained the teaching ofnatural law as set forth byThomas Aquinas. For example, regarding scientific study such as that of evolution, the church's unofficial position is an example oftheistic evolution, stating that faith and scientific findings regarding human evolution are not in conflict, though humans are regarded as a special creation, and that the existence of God is required to explain bothmonogenism and thespiritual component of human origins. Catholic schools have included all manners of scientific study in their curriculum for many centuries.[93] Historian John Heilbron says that "The Roman Catholic Church gave more financial and social support to the study of astronomy for over six centuries, from the recovery of ancient learning during the late Middle Ages into the Enlightenment, then any other, and probably all, other Institutions."[94]
Thefirst universities in Europe were established byCatholic Church monks.[2][3][4][95][96] The first Western European institutions generally considered to beuniversities were established in present-day Italy (including theKingdom of Sicily, theKingdom of Naples, and theKingdom of Italy), theKingdom of England, theKingdom of France,Holy Roman Empire, theKingdom of Spain, theKingdom of Portugal and theKingdom of Scotland between the 11th and 15th centuries for the study of thearts and the higher disciplines oftheology,law, andmedicine.[97] These universities evolved from much olderChristiancathedral schools andmonastic schools,[98][70][99] and it is difficult to define the exact date when they became true universities, though the lists ofstudia generalia for higher education in Europe held by theVatican are a useful guide:
Today almost all historians agree that Christianity (Catholicism as well Protestantism) moved many early-modem intellectuals to study nature systematically. Historians have also found that notions borrowed from Christian belief found their ways into scientific discourse, with glorious results.[100]
— Noah J. Efron
Galileo once stated "The intention of theHoly Spirit is to teach us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go."[101] In 1981,John Paul II, thenpope of theCatholic Church, spoke of the relationship this way: "The Bible itself speaks to us of the origin of the universe and its make-up, not in order to provide us with a scientific treatise, but in order to state the correct relationships of Man with God and with the universe. Sacred Scripture wishes simply to declare that the world was created by God, and in order to teach this truth it expresses itself in the terms of the cosmology in use at the time of the writer".[102] The influence of the Church on Western letters and learning has been formidable. The ancient texts of the Bible have deeply influenced Western art, literature and culture. For centuries following the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, small monastic communities were practically the only outposts of literacy in Western Europe. In time, the cathedral schools developed into Europe's earliest universities and the church has established thousands of primary, secondary and tertiary institutions throughout the world in the centuries since. The Church and clergymen have also sought at different times to censor texts and scholars. Thus, different schools of opinion exist as to the role and influence of the Church in relation to western letters and learning.
One view, first propounded byEnlightenment philosophers, asserts that the Church's doctrines are entirely superstitious and have hindered the progress of civilization.Communist states have made similar arguments in their education in order to inculcate a negative view of Catholicism (and religion in general) in their citizens. The most famous incidents cited by such critics are narratives of the Church in relation toCopernicus,Galileo Galilei andJohannes Kepler.
In opposition to this view, some historians of science, including non-Catholics such asJ.L. Heilbron,[103]A.C. Crombie,David Lindberg,[104]Edward Grant,Thomas Goldstein,[105] and Ted Davis, have argued that the Church had a significant, positive influence on the development of Western civilization. They hold that, not only did monks save and cultivate the remnants of ancient civilization during the barbarian invasions, but that the Church promoted learning and science through its sponsorship of manyuniversities which, under its leadership, grew rapidly in Europe in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. St.Thomas Aquinas, the Church's "model theologian," argued that reason is in harmony with faith, and that reason can contribute to a deeper understanding of revelation, and so encouraged intellectual development.[106] The Church's priest-scientists, many of whom wereJesuits, have been among the leading lights inastronomy,genetics,geomagnetism,meteorology,seismology, andsolar physics, becoming some of the "fathers" of these sciences. Examples include important churchmen such as theAugustinian abbotGregor Mendel (pioneer in the study of genetics),Roger Bacon (aFranciscan friar who was one of the early advocates of thescientific method), and Belgian priestGeorges Lemaître (the first to propose theBig Bang theory; seeReligious interpretations of the Big Bang theory). Other notable priest scientists have includedAlbertus Magnus,Robert Grosseteste,Nicholas Steno,Francesco Grimaldi,Giambattista Riccioli,Roger Boscovich, andAthanasius Kircher. Even more numerous are Catholic laity involved in science:Henri Becquerel who discoveredradioactivity;Galvani,Volta,Ampere,Marconi, pioneers inelectricity andtelecommunications;Lavoisier, "father of modernchemistry";Vesalius, founder of modernhuman anatomy; andCauchy, one of the mathematicians who laid the rigorous foundations ofcalculus.
Throughout history manyCatholic clerics have made significant contributions to science. These cleric-scientists includeNicolaus Copernicus,Gregor Mendel,Georges Lemaître,Albertus Magnus,Roger Bacon,Pierre Gassendi,Roger Joseph Boscovich,Marin Mersenne,Bernard Bolzano,Francesco Maria Grimaldi,Nicole Oresme,Jean Buridan,Robert Grosseteste,Christopher Clavius,Nicolas Steno,Athanasius Kircher,Giovanni Battista Riccioli,William of Ockham, and others. The Catholic Church has also produced manylay scientists and mathematicians.
The CatholicCistercian order used its ownnumbering system, which could express numbers from 0 to 9999 in a single sign.[107][108] According to one modernCistercian, "enterprise and entrepreneurial spirit" have always been a part of the order's identity, and the Cistercians "were catalysts for development of a market economy" in twelfth-century Europe.[109] Until theIndustrial Revolution, most of the technological advances in Europe were made in the monasteries.[109] According to the medievalist Jean Gimpel, their high level of industrial technology facilitated the diffusion of new techniques: "Every monastery had a model factory, often as large as the church and only several feet away, and waterpower drove the machinery of the various industries located on its floor."[110] Waterpower was used for crushing wheat, sieving flour, fulling cloth and tanning – a "level of technological achievement [that] could have been observed in practically all" of the Cistercian monasteries.[111]
The English science historianJames Burke examines the impact of Cistercian waterpower, derived from Roman watermill technology such as that ofBarbegal aqueduct and mill nearArles in the fourth of his ten-partConnections TV series, called "Faith in Numbers". TheCistercians made major contributions to culture and technology in medieval Europe:Cistercian architecture is considered one of the most beautiful styles ofmedieval architecture;[112] and the Cistercians were the main force of technological diffusion in fields such as agriculture andhydraulic engineering.[112]
Between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries, the teaching of science in Jesuit schools, as laid down in theRatio atque Institutio Studiorum Societatis Iesu ("The Official Plan of studies for the Society of Jesus") of 1599,[113] was almost entirely based on the works of Aristotle.
TheJesuits, nevertheless, have made numerous significant contributions to the development of science. For example, the Jesuits have dedicated significant study to earthquakes, andseismology has been described as "the Jesuit science".[114] The Jesuits have been described as "the single most important contributor to experimental physics in the seventeenth century".[115] According toJonathan Wright in his bookGod's Soldiers, by the eighteenth century 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 onJupiter's surface, the Andromeda nebula and Saturn's rings. They theorized about the circulation of the blood (independently ofHarvey), the theoretical possibility of flight, the way the moon affected the tides, and the wave-like nature of light."[116]
TheJesuit China missions of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries introduced Western science and astronomy, then undergoing its own revolution, to China. One modern historian writes that in late Ming courts, the Jesuits were "regarded as impressive especially for their knowledge of astronomy, calendar-making, mathematics, hydraulics, and geography".[117] The Society of Jesus introduced, according toThomas Woods, "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".[118] Another expert quoted by Woods said the Scientific Revolution brought by the Jesuits coincided with a time when science was at a very low level in China.
The missionary efforts and other work of theSociety of Jesus, or Jesuits, between the 16th and 17th century played a significant role in continuing the transmission of knowledge, science, and culture between China and the West, and influencedChristian culture in Chinese society today.
Protestantism has promoted economic growth and entrepreneurship, especially in the period after theScientific and theIndustrial Revolution.[119][120] Scholars have identified a positive correlation between the rise of Protestantism andhuman capital formation,[121]work ethic,[122]economic development,[123] and the development of the state system.[124]
Protestantism had an important influence on science,[125][126][127] according to theMerton thesis there was a positivecorrelation between the rise ofPuritanism andProtestantPietism on the one hand and earlyexperimental science on the other.[128] The Merton thesis has two separate parts: Firstly, it presents a theory that science changes due to an accumulation of observations and improvement in experimental techniques andmethodology; secondly, it puts forward the argument that the popularity of science in seventeenth-centuryEngland and the religiousdemography of theRoyal Society (English scientists of that time were predominantly Puritans or other Protestants) can be explained by acorrelation between Protestantism and the scientific values.[129] In his theory,Robert K. Merton focused on English Puritanism andGerman Pietism as having been responsible for the development of theScientific Revolution of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Merton explained that the connection betweenreligious affiliation and interest in science was the result of a significant synergy between theascetic Protestant values and those of modern science.[130] Protestant values encouraged scientific research by allowing science to studyGod's influence on the world and thus providing a religious justification for scientific research.[128]
According ofScientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States byHarriet Zuckerman, a review of American Nobel Prize winners awarded between 1901 and 1972, 72% of AmericanNobel Prize laureates, have identified fromProtestant background.[131][132] Overall, Americans of Protestant background have won a total of 84.2% of all awardedNobel Prizes in Chemistry,[131] 60% inMedicine,[131] 58.6% inPhysics,[131] between 1901 and 1972.
Some of the first colleges anduniversities in America, includingHarvard,[133]Yale,[134]Princeton,[135]Columbia,[136]Dartmouth,[137]Pennsylvania,[138][139]Duke,[140]Boston,[141]Williams,Bowdoin,Middlebury,[142] andAmherst, all were founded by mainline Protestant denominations.
The Religious Society of Friends, commonly known asQuakers, encouraged some values which may have been conducive to encouraging scientific talents. A theory suggested byDavid Hackett Fischer in his bookAlbion's Seed indicated early Quakers in the US preferred "practical study" to the more traditional studies ofGreek orLatin popular with the elite. Another theory suggests their avoidance of dogma or clergy gave them a greater flexibility in response to science.[143]
Despite those arguments a major factor is agreed to be that the Quakers were initially discouraged or forbidden to go to the major law or humanities schools in Britain due to theTest Act. They also at times faced similar discriminations in the United States, as many of the colonial universities had aPuritan orAnglican orientation. This led them to attend "Godless" institutions or forced them to rely on hands-on scientific experimentation rather than academia.[144]
Because of these issues it has been stated Quakers are better represented in science than most religions. There are sources, Pendlehill (Thomas 2000) andEncyclopædia Britannica, that indicate that for over two centuries they were overrepresented in theRoyal Society. Mention is made of this possibility in studies referenced inreligiosity and intellince and in a book by Arthur Raistrick. Whether this is still accurate, there have been several noteworthy members of this denomination in science. The following names a few.
Christian scientists and scholars (particularlyNestorian andJacobite Christians) contributed to the Arab Islamic Civilization during theUmmayad and theAbbasid periods by translating works ofGreek philosophers toSyriac and afterwards toArabic.[146][147][148] Over a century and a half, primarily Middle Eastern Oriental Syriac Christian scholars inHouse of Wisdom translated all scientific and philosophic Greek texts into Arabic language in the House of Wisdom.[149][150] They also excelled inphilosophy,science (Masawaiyh,[151]Eutychius of Alexandria, andJabril ibn Bukhtishu[152]) andtheology (such asTatian,Bardaisan,Babai the Great,Nestorius, andThomas of Marga) and the personalphysicians of the Abbasid Caliphs were often Christians, such as the long-servingBukhtishu dynasty.[153] Many scholars of theHouse of Wisdom were of Assyrian Christian background.[154][155]
Among the Copts in Egypt, every monastery and probably every church once had its own library of manuscripts.[156]
In the fifth century AD, nine Christian Syrian Monks translated Greek, Hebrew, and Syriac works into the Ethiopian language ofGe'ez and organized Christian monastic orders and schools, some of which are still in existence today. By the sixth century AD, Assyrian Christians had begun exporting back to the Byzantine Empire their own works on science, philosophy and medicine. the literary output of the Assyrians was vast. The third largest corpus of Christian writing, after Latin and Greek, is by the Assyrians in the Assyrian language. In the field of medicine, the AssyrianBukhtishu family produced nine generations of physicians, and founded the great medical school at Gundeshapur in Iran. When Abbasid Caliphal-Mansur became ill and no physician in Baghdad could cure him, he sent for the dean of the medical school inGundeshapur, which was renowned as the best of its time[157] The Assyrian philosopherJob of Edessa developed a physical theory of the universe, in the Assyrian language, that rivaled Aristotle's theory, and that sought to replace matter with forces (a theory that anticipated some ideas in quantum mechanics, such as the spontaneous creation and destruction of matter that occurs in the quantum vacuum).[158] One of the greatest Assyrian achievements of the fourth century was the founding of one of the oldest universities in the world, theSchool of Nisibis, which had three departments, theology, philosophy and medicine, and which became a magnet and center of intellectual development in the Middle East. The statutes of the School of Nisibis, which have been preserved, later became the model upon which the first Italian university was based.[159] The first Mongolian writing system (which was first set down by assyiran monks) used the Assyrian Aramaic and Syriac alphabets, with the name "Tora Bora" being an Assyrian phrase meaning "arid mountain." The hierarchical structure of Buddhism is modeled after the Church of the East. The Assyrian Christian Stephanos translated the work of Greek physicianPedanius Dioscorides into the Arabic language, and for over a century, this translated medical text was used by the Muslim states.[160][161][162][163]
In the field of Optics, Nestorian Christian Hunayn ibn-Ishaq's textbook on ophthalmology called theTen Treatises on the Eye, which was written in 950 A.D., remained the authoritative source on the subject in the western world until the 1800s.[164]
It was a Christian scholar and Bishop fromNisibis namedSeverus Sebokht who was the first to describe and incorporate Indian mathematical symbols in the mid 7th century, which were then adopted into Islamic culture and are now known as theArabic numerals.[165][166][167][168]
During the fourth through the seventh centuries, scholarly work in the Syriac and Greek languages was either newly initiated, or carried on from the Hellenistic period. Centers of learning and of transmission of classical wisdom included colleges such as theSchool of Nisibis, and later theSchool of Edessa, and the renowned hospital and medicalacademy of Jundishapur; libraries included theLibrary of Alexandria and theImperial Library of Constantinople; other centers of translation and learning functioned atMerv,Salonika,Nishapur andCtesiphon, situated just south of what later became Baghdad.[169][170] TheHouse of Wisdom was alibrary,translation institute, and academy established inAbbasid-eraBaghdad,Iraq.[171][172] Nestorians played a prominent role in the formation of Arab culture,[173] with theJundishapur school being prominent in the lateSassanid, Umayyad and early Abbasid periods.[174] The distinguished historian of scienceGeorge Sarton called Jundishapur "the greatest intellectual center of the time."[175] Notably, eight generations of the NestorianBukhtishu family served as private doctors to caliphs and sultans between the eighth and eleventh centuries.[176][177]
The common and persistent myth claiming that Islamic scholars "saved" the classical work of Aristotle and other Greek philosophers from destruction and then graciously passed it on to Europe is baseless. According to the myth, these works would otherwise have perished in the long European Dark Age between the fifth and tenth centuries. Ancient Greek texts and Greek culture were never "lost" to be somehow "recovered" and "transmitted" by Islamic scholars, as many keep claiming: the texts were always there, preserved and studied by the scholars and monks of the Byzantines and passed on to the rest of Europe and to the Islamic world at various times. Aristotle had been translated in France at the abbey of Mont Saint-Michel before translations of Aristotle into Arabic (via theSyriac of the Christian scholars from the conquered lands of the Byzantine Empire). Michael Harris points out:[178]
The great writings of the classical era, particularly those of Greece ... were always available to the Byzantines and to those Western peoples in cultural and diplomatic contact with the Eastern Empire.... Of the Greek classics known today, at least seventy-five percent are known through Byzantine copies.
HistorianJohn Julius Norwich adds that “much of what we know about antiquity—especially Hellenic and Roman literature and Roman law—would have been lost forever if it weren't for the scholars and scribes of Constantinople.”[179]
TheByzantine science played an important role in the transmission ofclassical knowledge to theIslamic world and toRenaissance Italy, and also in the transmission ofIslamic science to Renaissance Italy.[38][180] Many of the most distinguished classical scholars held high office in theEastern Orthodox Church.[40]The migration waves ofByzantine scholars and émigrés in the period following theCrusadersacking of Constantinople in 1204 and theend of the Byzantine Empire in 1453, is considered by many scholars key to the revival ofGreek andRoman studies that led to the development of theRenaissance humanism[181] andscience. These émigrés brought to Western Europe the relatively well-preserved remnants and accumulated knowledge of their own (Greek) civilization, which had mostly not survived the Early Middle Ages in the West. According to theEncyclopædia Britannica: "Many modern scholars also agree that the exodus of Greeks to Italy as a result of this event marked the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of the Renaissance".[182] The Byzantines pioneered the concept of the hospital as an institution offering medical care and the possibility of a cure for the patients, as a reflection of the ideals of Christian charity, rather than merely a place to die.[183]
Paper, which the Muslims received from China in the eighth century, was being used in the Byzantine Empire by the ninth century. There were very large private libraries, and monasteries possessed huge libraries with hundreds of books that were lent to people in each monastery's region. Thus were preserved the works of classical antiquity.[184][185]
When SaintCyril was sent by the Byzantine emperor in an embassy to the Arabs in the ninth century, he astonished his Muslim hosts with his knowledge of philosophy and science as well as theology. HistorianMaria Mavroudi recounts:[186]
When asked how it was possible for him to know all that he did, he [Cyril] drew an analogy between the Muslim reaction to his erudition and the pride of someone who kept sea water in a wine skin and boasted of possessing a rare liquid. He finally encountered someone from a region by the sea, who explained that only a madman would brag about the contents of the wine skin, since people from his own homeland possessed an endless abundance of sea water. The Muslims are like the man with the wine skin and the [Greeks] like the man from the sea because, according to the saint's concluding remark in his response, all learning emanated from the [Greeks].
In recent history, the theory ofevolution has been at the centre of controversy between Christianity and science, largely in America. Christians who accept a literal interpretation of thebiblical account of creation find incompatibility betweenDarwinian evolution and their interpretation of the Christian faith.[187]Creation science orscientific creationism[188] is a branch ofcreationism that attempts to provide scientific support for theGenesis creation narrative in theBook of Genesis and attempts to disprove generally acceptedscientific facts,theories andscientific paradigms about thegeological history of Earth,formation of the Solar System,Big Bang cosmology,the chemical origins of life andevolution.[189][190] It began in the 1960s as afundamentalist Christian effort in the United States to proveBiblical inerrancy and falsify the scientificevidence for evolution.[191] It has since developed a sizable religious following in the United States, with creation science ministries branching worldwide.[192] In 1925, The State of Tennessee passed theButler Act, which prohibited the teaching of the theory of evolution in all schools in the state. Later that year, a similar law was passed in Mississippi, and likewise, Arkansas in 1927. In 1968, these "anti-monkey" laws were struck down by theSupreme Court of the United States as unconstitutional, "because they established a religious doctrine violating both theFirst andFourth Amendments to theConstitution."[193]
Most scientists have rejected creation science for several reasons, including that its claims do not refer to natural causes and cannot be tested. In 1987, theUnited States Supreme Court ruled that creationism isreligion, not science, and cannot be advocated inpublic school classrooms.[194]
Theistic evolution is a discipline that accepts the current scientific understanding of the age of the Earth and the theory of evolution. It includes a range of beliefs, including views described asevolutionary creationism, which accepts contemporary science, but also upholds classical religious understandings of God and creation in Christian context.[195] This position has been endorsed by the Catholic Church.[196] Proponents of theistic evolution include prominent Christian philosopher and theologian,William Lane Craig, Founder ofBioLogos,Francis Collins, Prominent conservative Christian Theologian,Tim Keller, and prominent Christian philosopherAlvin Plantinga.
Christian Scholars and Scientists have made noted contributions to science and technology fields,[12][13][14] as well asmedicine,[15] both historically and in modern times. Many well-known historical figures who influenced Western science considered themselves Christian such asNicolaus Copernicus,[197]Galileo Galilei,[198]Johannes Kepler,[199]Isaac Newton[200]Robert Boyle,[201]Francis Bacon,[202]Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz,[203]Emanuel Swedenborg,[204]Alessandro Volta,[205]Carl Friedrich Gauss,[206]Antoine Lavoisier,[207]André-Marie Ampère,John Dalton,[208]James Clerk Maxwell,[209][210]William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin,[211]Louis Pasteur,[212]Michael Faraday,[213] andJ. J. Thomson.[214][215]
Isaac Newton, for example, believed thatgravity caused theplanets to revolve about theSun, and creditedGod with thedesign. In the concluding General Scholium to thePhilosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, he wrote: "This most beautiful System of the Sun, Planets and Comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful being." Other famous founders of science who adhered to Christian beliefs include Galileo, Johannes Kepler,René Descartes,Blaise Pascal, and others.[216][217]
Throughout history manyCatholic clerics have made significant contributions to science. These cleric-scientists includeNicolaus Copernicus,Gregor Mendel,Georges Lemaître,Albertus Magnus,Roger Bacon,Pierre Gassendi,Roger Joseph Boscovich,Marin Mersenne,Bernard Bolzano,Francesco Maria Grimaldi,Nicole Oresme,Jean Buridan,Robert Grosseteste,Christopher Clavius,Nicolas Steno,Athanasius Kircher,Giovanni Battista Riccioli,William of Ockham, and others. The Catholic Church has also produced manylay scientists and mathematicians.
Prominent modern scientists advocating Christian belief include Nobel Prize–winning physicistsCharles Townes (United Church of Christ member) andWilliam Daniel Phillips (United Methodist Church member), evangelical Christian and past head of theHuman Genome ProjectFrancis Collins, and climatologistJohn T. Houghton.[218]
Some scholars have noted a direct tie between "particular aspects of traditional Christianity" and the rise of science.[18][71]
Protestantism has had an important influence on science, according to theMerton thesis, there was a positivecorrelation between the rise of EnglishPuritanism and GermanPietism on the one hand and earlyexperimental science on the other.[219][220][221]Robert K. Merton focused on English Puritanism and German Pietism as having been responsible for the development of theScientific Revolution of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. He explained that the connection betweenreligious affiliation and interest in science was the result of a significant synergy between theascetic Protestant values and those of modern science.[222]
The history professorPeter Harrison attributes Christianity to having contributed to the rise of the Scientific Revolution:
historians of science have long known that religious factors played a significantly positive role in the emergence and persistence of modern science in the West. Not only were many of the key figures in the rise of science individuals with sincere religious commitments, but the new approaches to nature that they pioneered were underpinned in various ways by religious assumptions. ... Yet, many of the leading figures in the scientific revolution imagined themselves to be champions of a science that was more compatible with Christianity than the medieval ideas about the natural world that they replaced.[223]
According to100 Years of Nobel Prizes a review of Nobel prizes award between 1901 and 2000 reveals that (65.4%) ofNobel Prizes Laureates, have identified Christianity in its various forms as their religious preference (427 prizes).[225] Overall, Christians are considered a total of 72.5% inChemistry between 1901 and 2000,[224] 65.3% inPhysics,[224] 62% inMedicine,[224] 54% inEconomics.[224] Between 1901 and 2000 it was revealed that among 654 Laureates 31.9% have identified asProtestant in its various forms (208 prize), 20.3% wereChristians (no information about their denominations; 133 prize), 11.6% have identified asCatholic and 1.6% have identified asEastern Orthodox.[226] Although Christians make up over 33.2% of the world's population,[227][228][229][230] they have won a total of 65.4% of all Nobel prizes between 1901 and 2000.[231]
In an estimate by scholarBenjamin Beit-Hallahmi, between 1901 and 2001, about 57.1% ofNobel prize winners were either Christians or with a Christian background.[21] Between 1901 and 2001, about 56.5% of laureates in scientific fields were Christians.[21] According to scholarBenjamin Beit-Hallahmi, Protestants were overrepresented in scientific categories and Catholics were well-represented in the Literature and Peace categories.[21]
In an estimate made by Weijia Zhang fromArizona State University and Robert G. Fuller fromUniversity of Nebraska–Lincoln, between 1901 and 1990, 60% ofPhysics Nobel prize winners had Christian backgrounds.[232]
According ofScientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States byHarriet Zuckerman, a review of American Nobel prizes winners awarded between 1901 and 1972, 72% of AmericanNobel Prize Laureates, have identified fromProtestant background.[131][132] Overall, Americans of Protestant background have won a total of 84.2% of all awardedNobel Prizes in Chemistry,[131] 60% inMedicine,[131] 58.6% inPhysics,[131] between 1901 and 1972.
Events inChristian Europe, such as theGalileo affair, that were associated with theScientific Revolution and theAge of Enlightenment led scholars such asJohn William Draper to postulate aconflict thesis, holding that religion and science have been in conflict methodologically, factually and politically throughout history. This thesis is held by several scientists likeRichard Dawkins andLawrence Krauss. While the conflict thesis remains popular inatheistic and antireligious circles, it has lost favor among most contemporary historians of science,[22][23][24][233] and the majority of scientists in elite universities in the U.S. do not hold a conflict view.[234]
More recently,Thomas E. Woods, Jr., asserts that, despite the widely held conception of the Catholic Church as being anti-science, this conventional wisdom has been the subject of "drastic revision" by historians of science over the last 50 years. Woods asserts that the mainstream view now is that the "Church [has] played a positive role in the development of science ... even if this new consensus has not yet managed to trickle down to the general public."[235] Science historianRonald L. Numbers corroborates this view, writing that "Historians of science have known for years that White's and Draper's accounts are more propaganda than history. ...Yet the message has rarely escaped the ivory tower."[236]
While figures like John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White are frequently cited in historical literature as the primary architects of the conflict thesis, historian James C. Ungureanu demonstrates this attribution is fundamentally misleading. In his work,Science, Religion, and the Protestant Tradition: Retracing the Origins of Conflict (2019), Ungureanu reveals that Draper and White were not, in fact, original theorists but rather popularizers who synthesized and amplified pre-existing 19th-century Protestant, anti-Catholic polemic. Ungureanu argues that both authors extensively borrowed rhetorical frameworks and historical examples crafted by progressive liberal theologians engaged in intra-Protestant debates seeking to reform Christianity against perceived Catholic-like dogmatism. Their influential narratives, therefore, were less objective historical accounts and more theologically motivated constructs, shaped by specific religious controversies (particularly anti-Catholicism and liberal Protestant agendas), thus undercutting the thesis's claim to universal historical truth. Ungureanu's scholarship reframes the origins of the conflict narrative as a product of partisan religious discourse rather than a neutral reading of the past.[237]
In 1610, Galileo published hisSidereus Nuncius (Starry Messenger), describing observations made with his newtelescope. These and other discoveries exposed difficulties with the understanding of theheavens that was common at the time. Scientists, along with the Catholic Church, had adopted Aristotle's view of the Earth as fixed in place, since Aristotle's rediscovery 300 years prior.[238] Jeffrey Foss writes that, by Galileo's time, the Aristotelian-Ptolemaic view of the universe had become "fully integrated with Catholic theology".[239]: 285
Scientists of the day largely rejected Galileo's assertions, since most had no telescope, and Galileo had no physical theory to explain how planets could orbit the Sun which, according to Aristotelian physics, was impossible. (That would not be resolved for another hundred years.) Galileo's peers alerted religious authorities to his "errors" and asked them to intervene.[239]: 285–286 In response, the church forbade Galileo from teaching it, though it did not forbid discussing it, so long as it was clear it was merely a hypothesis. Galileo published books and asserted scientific superiority.[239]: 285 He was summoned before the Roman Inquisition twice. First warned, he was next sentenced to house arrest on a charge of "grave suspicion of heresy".[239]: 286
TheGalileo affair has been considered by many to be a defining moment in the history of therelationship between religion and science. Since the creation of theConflict thesis by Andrew Dickson White and John William Draper in the late nineteenth century, religion has been depicted as oppressive and oppositional to science.[240] Edward Daub explains that, while "twentieth century historians of science dismantled White and Draper's claims, it is still popular in public perception".[241] Casting Galileo's story as a contest between science and religion is an oversimplification, writes Jeffrey Foss.[239]: 286 Galileo was heir to a long scientific tradition with deep medieval Christian roots.[46]
Many of the medieval universities in Western Europe were born under the aegis of the Catholic Church, usually as cathedral schools or by papal bull as Studia Generali.
All the great European universities-Oxford, to Paris, to Cologne, to Prague, to Bologna—were established with close ties to the Church.
Europe established schools in association with their cathedrals to educate priests, and from these emerged eventually the first universities of Europe, which began forming in the eleventh and twelfth centuries.
... Many of the scientists who contributed to these developments were Christians...
... the Christian contribution to science has been uniformly at the top level, but it has reached that level and it has been sufficiently strong overall ...
... . Many of the early leaders of the scientific revolution were Christians of various stripes, including Roger Bacon, Copernicus, Kepler, Francis Bacon, Galileo, Newton, Boyle, Pascal, Descartes, Ray, Linnaeus and Gassendi...
Many prominent Catholic physicians and psychologists have made significant contributions to hypnosis in medicine, dentistry, and psychology.
The conflict thesis, at least in its simple form, is now widely perceived as a wholly inadequate intellectual framework within which to construct a sensible and realistic historiography of Western science
In the late Victorian period it was common to write about the 'warfare between science and religion' and to presume that the two bodies of culture must always have been in conflict. However, it is a very long time since these attitudes have been held by historians of science.
In its traditional forms, the conflict thesis has been largely discredited.
..one of the most common myths widely held about the trial of Galileo, including several elements: that he "saw" the earth's motion (an observation still impossible to make even in the twenty-first century); that he was "imprisoned" by the Inquisition (whereas he was actually held under house arrest); and that his crime was to have discovered the truth. And since to condemn someone for this reason can result only from ignorance, prejudice, and narrow-mindedness, this is also the myth that alleges the incompatibility between science and religion.
Many of the medieval universities in Western Europe were born under the aegis of the Catholic Church, usually as cathedral schools or by papal bull as Studia Generali.
All the great European universities-Oxford, to Paris, to Cologne, to Prague, to Bologna—were established with close ties to the Church.
Europe established schools in association with their cathedrals to educate priests, and from these emerged eventually the first universities of Europe, which began forming in the eleventh and twelfth centuries.
It would be indefensible to maintain, withHooykaas andJaki, that Christianity was fundamentally responsible for the successes of seventeenth-century science. It would be a mistake of equal magnitude, however, to overlook the intricate interlocking of scientific and religious concerns throughout the century.
As to specifically Christian theists, an example of continue presence would be theAmerican Scientific Affiliation. It currently has about two thousand members, all of whom affirm the Apostles' Creed as part of joining the association, and most of whom hold Ph.D.s in the natural sciences. Their active journal isPerspectives on Science and Christian Faith. Across the Atlantic, the Society of Ordained Scientists and Christians in Science are similar affiliation in Great Britain.
For instance, concerning the religious origins of American laureates, 72 percent are Protestant ...
Of all these northern schools, only Columbia and the University of Pennsylvania were historically Anglican; the rest are associated with revivalist Presbyterianism or Congregationalism.
Princeton was Presbyterian, while Columbia and Pennsylvania were Episcopalian.
Duke University has historical, formal, on-going, and symbolic ties with Methodism, but is an independent and non-sectarian institution ... Duke would not be the institution it is today without its ties to the Methodist Church. However, the Methodist Church does not own or direct the University. Duke is and has developed as a private nonprofit corporation which is owned and governed by an autonomous and self-perpetuating Board of Trustees
Boston University has been historically affiliated with the United Methodist Church since 1839 when the Newbury Biblical Institute, the first Methodist seminary in the United States, was established in Newbury, Vermont.
Neither were there any Muslims among the Ninth-Century translators. Almost all of them were Christians of various Eastern denominations: Jacobites, Melchites, and, above all, Nestorians... A few others were Sabians.
{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)Most creationists are simply people who choose to believe that God created the world-either as described in Scripture or through evolution. Creation scientists, by contrast, strive to use legitimate scientific means both to argue against evolutionarytheory and to prove the creation account as described in Scripture.
... while [John] Brooke's view [of a complexity thesis rather than an historical conflict thesis] has gained widespread acceptance among professional historians of science, the traditional view remains strong elsewhere, not least in the popular mind.
