Does God want nothing more than to keep us down?

Why we need religion in the space age
Higgs boson

Higgs boson

The following comes from a July 24 story by Daniel Ross Goodman on the Public Discourse site.

Does religion have anything to offer us in the space age? Astrophysicists recently confirmed the existence of cosmic inflation (which accounts for the rapid expansion of the universe during the first fraction of a second after the Big Bang). Now that we know about dark matter, dark energy, the Higgs boson, the existence of other earth-like planets, and a thousand other shocking cosmological revelations, it is tempting to suggest that religion will become relegated to playing the role of quaint typewriter to astrophysics’ astounding computer. Will religion have any relevance in the twenty-first century and beyond?

Because we no longer need religion to explain how the universe works, religion—for these and other reasons—continues to take an intellectual beating; just witness a recent issue of The New Yorker, where faith suffered a double-whammy roundhouse blow from two of my favorite writers, Neil deGrasse Tyson and Adam Gopnik.

I loved Tyson’s answer to the question of whether he is an atheist: “It’s odd that the word ‘atheist’ even exists,” he responded. “I don’t play golf. Is there a word for non-golf players? Do non-golf players gather and strategize? Do non-skiers have a word, come together, and talk about the fact that they don’t ski?” In other words, for many people—and perhaps especially for astrophysicists—religion is so irrelevant to their lives that its irrelevance need not even be justified.

But perhaps Tyson employed the wrong analogy. Of course non-golfers are not anti-golfers. The more apt analogy would be asking a non-reader if he’s an “anti-reader.”

It is possible to lead a good, ethical, and moral life without reading books. But a life without reading is a life diminished. Like a life without music or humor or love, a life without books lacks an additional dimension; one can still exist on a physical plane, but without reading, one will miss out on a certain kind of beauty. An astrophysicist need not be a reader of literary fiction in order to investigate the lives of stars. But a science without literary fiction is a science diminished: it is a science that may not be fully attentive to the lives of human beings; it may be a science that lacks empathy; and it may be an astrophysics that is not fully conscious of the human stakes of cosmology.

As with literary fiction, so with religion. A future without religion will be a future diminished, for faith—but only a certain kind of faith—is absolutely necessary in the space age.

Yes, there is a certain kind of faith that has no place in the age of space: it is the kind of faith that seeks to limit us, to shrink us, and to disempower us by treating us as irredeemable sinners. The kind of faith that has no place in space is the austere faith that imagines an authoritarian God who wants nothing more than to keep us down and earthbound with rigid rules. The kind of faith that has no place in space is the otherworldly faith that preaches about the world-to-come rather than urging us to make life better in the world-that-is.

But there is a faith that we unquestionably need in the space age. There is a kind of faith that empowers us—it is a faith that believes in a kind of God that, above all else, is a God of life. This God of life, to paraphrase 12 Years a Slave, doesn’t only want us to survive; the God of life wants us to live. And this God doesn’t only want us to live; this God wants us to flourish. This God wants us to be all that we can be. Living with this kind of faith means believing that we must do everything possible to survive, to live, and to flourish.

Religion cannot, nor should it, attempt to explain how the world was created, nor should it attempt to explain how the universe works. Science, not religion, possesses the answers to these questions. But religion, not science, can explain why the world was created, and can elucidate the meanings behind the workings of the universe. As Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks has written, “science takes things apart to see how they work. Religion puts things together to see what they mean….”

To read the entire story, click here.

Comments

comments

To add a comment, click on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ icons OR go further down to the bottom of comments to the Post your comment box.

Comments

  1. “Does religion have anything to offer us in the space age? Here is my response to that rhetorical question:

    Religion is about the supernatural. Science is about the natural. Therefore science is purely a practical, or material pursuit, i.e a tool to figure out the physical universe.. Science is not philosophy. Whereas science is only as big as the universe, philosophy is far bigger still. Even if we human’s figure out everything there is to know about the physical world, we would be no different in our need to worship our Creator than were our brothers and sisters, who lived over 3,000 years ago.

  2. The Higgs boson confirms creation of matter stemming from the big bang. This is consistent with creationist theology,not contrary to it.

    • Your Fellow Catholic says:

      Mac, methinks you confuse “creationism” with belief in a creator. I suspect you are not a creationist.

  3. St Peter says:

    What a lovely meditation on the role of religion in the modern world. It calls to mind what Jesus says to his disciples in John 10: “I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly.”

    I wonder if many who are atheist – atheist in the way described by this reflection as “anti-theist” – are not so much against God as they are against this image of God so often displayed by extremists: God waiting to cast souls into hell, A God who rewards the judgmental, God eager to destroy those who fail to live up to fickle and arbitrary rules. Why wouldn’t people be against such a “god”? Jesus himself warns that the sheep will not listen to such a voice. They are nothing more that the thief: “the thief comes to steal and destroy”.

    • Many people believe in a god who does not chasten his children. I cannot believe in that type of god, because a god such that would not care what we do to one another. A god who looks the other way when we hit, murder, steal or do bodily harm to one another is not a loving god. A god who allows us to misuse other people’s bodies when it harms them, such as in so-called same-sex marriage is not a loving god as far as I am concerned. I believe in a loving Heavenly Father who does chasten at times to bring us back to him, and who does sometimes allow us to suffer the consequences of our own actions so as to stop us from doing what is wrong and against nature. As Fr. Marx of Human Life Internal once said, God rest his soul, “God forgives and man forgives, but nature never forgives.” or to put it another way, “In nature they are no punishments, just consequences.”

    • A correction: “In nature there are neither rewards nor punishments, just consequences.”

  4. Anonymous says:

    I could tell that the author was not a Christian.

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.

Speak Your Mind

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.