Beginning of All Things: Science and Religion

"The reason of natural science can enter into a discussion with faith. Faith, as Pascal said, has its reasons that reason doesn't know. God is not a category for science, but there is room for faith in divine creation. Let us Not Preach to the Scientists. A theologian should not cast doubt on a scientific consensus, but should see how he can deal with it." Hans Küng. Evolution vs intelligent design: Conservative voices have dominated the theologian's defense of God's active role in evolution and/or creation of the species, in debates over evolution versus intelligent design. Last year, the eminent Hans Küng, one of the Roman Catholics leading theologian has published a study that tolerates evolution, as scientists would describe it, while still maintaining a role for God, describing God's activity not on the side of intelligent design supporters, as the designer of complex forms of life, but as the founder of the laws of nature by which life evolved, (e.g. beyond Samuel Alexander's 'Space, Time and Deity). Küng has little patience either for scientists who are myopic beyond the limits of their disciplines, or for theologians who try to tell the scientists how things must have come to be, in elaborating the adventure of creation. He masterfully concludes, "I understand the views of the agnostics and atheists. But I also see the questions that agnosticism can't and doesn't want to answer. I can fully understand those who want to have a basis in faith but think that a fundamentalism that takes the Bible literally does justice neither to the Bible nor to today's people. We can reach what I would call a reasonable middle position. ... These court cases over evolution are counterproductive. They damage religion and don't help at all." Has God intervened in Crevolution? An intervention is usually something violent or aggressive, 'though' religion can interpret evolution as creation" What Kung attempted to reject is the concept of Divine intervention against the laws of nature, whom he has perfected. "I would even go further and say that for science, God is not a category because God by definition is a reality beyond time and space, and therefore does not belong in the world of our scientific experience. But there are questions that science cannot answer. The fundamental question of philosophy, according to Leibnitz, is "why is there anything at all and not simply nothing?" Science can't answer that," articulates Hans Kung in a recent telephone interview. Eminent Cardinal Schönborn has entered the evolution debate to counter what the Pope regards as the growing influence of materialist thinking. Kung agrees that materialism is a primitive world view, even if it is presented in a scientific way. But, even though, it's not viable to try to prove religious doctrines to scientists. "It is a gigantic achievement of humanity that, at the end of a process of 13.7 billion years, there are small beings who are the first, as far as we know, who try to u

In this book Kung uses his broad familiarity with modern science to consider how recent findings and theories relate to the question of faith in God. He is particularly good in the area of physics, where he provides a wealth of excerpts from the writings of some of the great physicists of the 20th century as they consider fundamental questions raised by their discoveries. He clearly points out the difference between scientific and religious thinking, not hesitating to reproach religious as well as scientific thinkers for not recognizing the validity of the other's methods and points of view. Along the way he never hesitates to reproach Church authorities for the methods they have used and unfortunately continue to use in their attempts to maintain orthodoxy. As a Catholic scientist I find his tone somewhat harsh in this regard, but I support his steadfast refusal to accept their disciplinary procedures in his uphill attempts at making the faith comprehensible to modern men and women. He is definitely ahead of the curve and this makes for controversy. It is important to point out that in spite of his left-of-center theological opinions he remains a priest in good standing and is held in respect by his former colleague and friend from Tübingen, the current pope, Benedict XVI. In fact in the fall of 2005 he had a friendly dinner and extended conversation with the pope, on which occasion he presented him with a copy of this book and received the pope's appreciation for his efforts in promoting dialog between science and religion. Some of the questions covered in the book are: what is the nature of reality; what came before the big bang; what does religion mean by creation; is there a role for empirical science in the question of God; how did life originate; how did humans come to be; what is the relationship between the brain and consciousness; and many other flash points in the contemporary exchanges between science and religion. He concludes his book with a magnificent description of the end of life as not dying into nothingness, as many in modern science would have it, but rather as dying into the ultimate reality we call God. To quote him: "dying is a farewell inward, an entry and homecoming into the ground and origin of the world...dying into the light." A beautiful book!

Hans Kung has been a formidable intellect in theology for many years having written over 50 books. His writing is characterized by breadth of learning. His book Infallible? An Enquiry (1978) led to loss of his license to teach theology in Roman Catholic schools but did not discourage him from pushing the theological envelope. For those who regard it as important, Kung's views were never found to be heretical. Now retired from his professorship at Tubingen University, Kung turns his attention in this volume to the question whether science and religion can coexist. His answer is that they do more than coexist; they are complimentary. Kung defines complementarity as a state "between science and religion in which the distinctive spheres are preserved, all illegitimate transitions are avoided and all absolutizations are rejected, but in which in mutual questioning and enrichment people attempt to do justice to reality in all its dimensions." Kung immediately engages the skeptic's question whether he argues for an unenlightened biblical belief in a being that created the world in six days. Kung replies: "Certainly not! I want to take the Bible seriously, but that doesn't mean I want to take it literally." Kung begins with an engaging and clear tour through cosmology. He leaves nothing out from Copernicus to Newton, Einstein, Big Bang theory, Heisenberg's indeterminacy and Godel's incompleteness. Kung's point is, not surprisingly, that science cannot account for everything. Kung draws us back to the fundamental questions about the origin of the first structures in the universe. Science may be able to explain the fine tuning of the first structures but the question remains: where did the minimal structure that already existed at the Big Bang come from? Why isn't there nothing? Kung offers God as a reasonable hypothesis that can provide intellectual answers to the questions of the beginning. In succeeding chapters Kung takes up the debate between creationism and evolution, life in the universe and the development of human beings. He includes discussion of the brain and the mind, the limits of brain research and the beginning of human ethics. Having started with the beginning of all things, his epilogue deals with the end of all things - hypotheses of the end of the universe and apocalyptic visions of the end. Kung does not set out new theories of science or religion and does not insist on one or the other as the final arbiter of reality (his term). Discussion today, like so much else, tends to polarize between those who view God as irrelevant versus the creationists and the left-behinders. Kung proposes to raise the level of discussion by invoking serious scientists and philosophers. The Beginning of All Things is a good starting point for clear and dispassionate descriptions of the interplay between serious science and serious philosophy/theology about the most intriguing and still unsolved mysteries of the universe and humanity.

Kung is one of the clearest theologians thinkers writing today. There are a glut of books out there promising to weigh in on some pressing issue that concerns the science/ religion controversy. I personally believe that it is a bogus issue largely fed by the publishing industry. That said, I think Kung's book is one of the few on the subject worth reading. I have read Dawkins and Hitchens and am generally sympathetic with their views. But Kung points out that while science (and history) may have much to say about human beings and perhaps what drives religious movements, it has absolutely nothing to say about God. Kung reminds us of the often forgotten distinction between religious experience and religious organizations. This book lays out the fundamental issue more clearly than any I have encountered.

Hans Kung happens to be my favorite theologian. He writes very readable books, epitomizes a huge amount of scholarship, and offers brief and perceptive summaries of points of view hostile to his own. I think this is one of his best books. For all who labor in the vinyards of the conflicts between science and religion, this will be not only a very helpful book, but a very enjoyable one to read.