Has the term religion been 'redefined'?

Rite and Reason: Whether science and religion are converging won't be known for some time, but both are now more aware of the…

Rite and Reason: Whether science and religion are converging won't be known for some time, but both are now more aware of the dangers of dogmatism, writes Ian Ellis

It was somewhat surprising to note the rather chatty style of Richard Dawkins' article on "The Great Convergence" (The Irish Times, 17th February), in which he claimed that science and religion are not "converging". Whether they are or not is of course a very important question, but it is at least interesting to note that many people are describing our postmodern, Western society as both post-atheist and post-Christian.

If Western society generally is neither traditionally atheistic nor traditionally Christian, then it is clear that a certain new ground is opening up for reflection on spiritual things and on the relationship between science and religion. In such a context, the Christian Church clearly proclaims its faith in a culturally less hostile environment.

The problem with Dawkins's article lies in his use of the term "religion", which can have a broad application. Certainly, the Christian religion is theistic, but even theism defies human definition, the doctrine of the Trinity being a statement of faith and nothing like a scientific analysis.

READ MORE

Yet, an atheistic but nonetheless spiritual approach to life, while not Christian in any classical sense, could in fact be described as "religious" in its own way. Dawkins's own recognition, with Ursula Goodenough, of science being "a wellspring of solace and hope" could indeed be indicative of a religious outlook. It is not necessary to hold classical theistic doctrines in order to be religious; it is only necessary to adhere to some kind of faith system.

That, is not to say such an approach is specifically Christian, but it can still be described as religious. It is not that the term religion has been "redefined", as Dawkins suggests, but rather that he has too narrow a conception of what constitutes a religious outlook.

There is also an unsatisfactory element in Dawkins' comment: "There may be some deep questions about the cosmos that are forever beyond science. The mistake is to think that they are therefore not beyond religion too." Certainly, from a Christian perspective at least, while there is belief in a creator there is at the same time no desire to promote any "god-of-the-gaps" concept.

It is precisely because religion does not give answers in the same way that science does, precisely because religion is not about "knowing" in any empirical sense, that there is a tendency to feel one is in religious territory when posing questions that are beyond scientific answer.

Again, Dawkins refers to Bertrand Russell's "teapot" theory, that since we cannot disprove that a china teapot is in elliptical orbit around the sun, the theory must be on level terms with the theory that there is no such orbiting teapot.

The problem with this line of argument, however, is that a religious outlook is precisely not properly described as a theory. Christianity, to be specific, is a faith which has been enunciated in various doctrinal and theistic terms, but it would be inadequate to describe these as a theories. Christian doctrine is not a set of theoretical statements, but is, rather, a conceptual framework within which people think about the ineffable God and Jesus Christ.

Dawkins claims that religion has not "moved on", instancing the fact that there has been the relatively recent "infallible" pronouncement by Pope Pius XII of the Roman Catholic dogma of the Assumption (1950). However, the point must be made that this doctrine was not in fact infallible because no ecclesiastical statement of doctrine can ever make such a claim, precisely because the things of God are essentially incapable of full human definition.

So, are religion and science converging? It will only be possible to make a proper assessment of this matter as time goes on. What we can at least say now is that both religion (including Christianity) and science are becoming more aware of the dangers of dogmatism.

o Ian Ellis is Church of Ireland rector at Newcastle, Co Down, and editor of the Church of Ireland Gazette.