Letters to the Editor

Science and religion aren't independent of one another

In the May 29 Sound Off column, one of your readers, an atheist, referring to an earlier expressed biblical view that the universe was only 6,000 years old and not the billions of years maintained by science, stated there is "no proof of a god but plenty to prove science is correct."

In my religion, faith and reason are not deemed to be in opposition but complementary. The notion that our universe is billions of years old is not a problem. In fact, from what I have read, the concept of the Big Bang is actually attributable to a Catholic priest!

The allegation that there is no proof of a god is a bit myopic. One of the basic tools of science is the principle of causality. So, too, with the philosopher and the theologian. Thomas Aquinas, a fan of the eminent Greek philosopher Aristotle, offered five proofs for the existence of God. Many a thinker has looked at our amazing universe and concluded someone had to cause it all, to paint the marvelous picture.

As finite humans, we may never have absolute certitude about anything, but clearly we can have that type of certitude we use in matters of importance, e.g., the standard of reasonable doubt in criminal cases and that of preponderance in civil cases.

As we view our universe, are not most of us over-whelmed by what we see, and led to a conviction that this had to be the work of someone of immense power and intelligence?


Pass Christian