Dr. Loren Eiseley, the former Benjamin Franklin Professor of Anthropology and History of Science at the University of Pennsylvania, once wrote:
“…we must also observe that in one of those strange permutations of which history yields occasional rare examples, it is the Christian world which finally gave birth in a clear, articulate fashion to the experimental method of science itself.” (Eiseley 1958)
Eiseley, who said that he professed no religion, thought the fact that the scientific method arose in the Christian world is “strange.” However, anyone who carefully reads the works of the man who brought us the scientific method, Roger Bacon, will see that it makes perfect sense. Bacon (not Francis, but Roger) was a Franciscan friar who originally studied at Oxford. He was heavily influenced by the works of Robert Grosseteste, who taught at Oxford before becoming Bishop of Lincoln. While it is not clear whether the two met in person, Bacon was committed to Grosseteste’s interpretation of Aristotle’s dual path of scientific reasoning: Generalize from observations to come up with a universal law, and then use that law to make predictions, the truth of which can be demonstrated.
Bacon made it clear what should constitute a prediction’s demonstration: experiment, which he more generally called “experience.” In 1267, he finished Opus Majus, an 878-page work which was intended as a preamble to a much larger book that would lay out a new vision for Medieval university education. That larger book was never completed, but its intended preamble is considered an incredibly important work that laid the foundations for modern science.
Part Six of Opus Majus is entitled “Experimental Science,” and it begins this way:
“Having laid down fundamental principles of the wisdom of the Latins so far as they are found in language, mathematics, and optics, I now wish to unfold the principles of experimental science, since without experience nothing can be sufficiently known” (Bacon, 1962, p. 583)
He goes on to say that science is built on reasoning and experience, and both must be used. Reasoning produces a conclusion, but using experience to demonstrate the truth of the conclusion removes doubt about the conclusion. In other words, if you draw a conclusion about a series of observations you have made, you cannot be sure that the conclusion is reasonable unless it is tested by experience (experiment). This, of course, is an outline of the modern scientific method: make observations, form a hypothesis, and then test the hypothesis with experimentation.
But what is the source of this hypothesis? It is rooted in observations, but what allows a scientist to go from those observations to a hypothesis? Bacon himself tells us:
“It is necessary, therefore, that the intellect of man should be otherwise aided, and for this reason the holy patriarchs and prophets, who first gave sciences to the world, received illumination within and were not dependent on sense alone. The same is true of many believers since the time of Christ. For the grace of faith illuminates greatly, as also do divine inspirations, not only in things spiritual, but in things corporeal and in the sciences of philosophy…” (Bacon 1962b, p. 585)
In other words, according to Bacon, scientists should count on Divine inspiration to aid them in developing their hypotheses. Just as Christ can speak to us about issues in our spiritual lives, He can also speak to us about issues of science. Now, of course, we know that Satan can masquerade as an angel of Light (1 Corinthians 11:14), so not all inspirations are Divine. That’s why we must test our hypotheses with experiment. Nevertheless, Bacon sees Divine inspiration as a natural part of the scientific process. But these days, there are plenty of successful scientists who are not open to Divine inspiration.
Surely this demonstrates that Divine inspiration is not necessary for science. That is most certainly true, but Bacon makes a bold statement about that:
“Virtue, therefore, clarifies the mind, so that a man comprehends more easily not only moral but scientific truths.” (Bacon, 1962, p. 586)
By “virtue,” Bacon is referring to an innocent soul – one that has been purified by the blood of Christ. In other words, he is saying that while it is possible to do science without divine inspiration, leaves you at a disadvantage. A Christian mind could better comprehend scientific truth. Such a view would seem, to the modern scientific ear, radical and perhaps even outrageous. Yet it is the opinion of the man who gave us the modern scientific method. Bacon sees Christianity and science as partners in the quest for truth.
REFERENCES:
Loren Eiseley, Darwin’s Century (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1958), p. 62
The Opus Majus of Roger Bacon, Robert Bell Burke, translator, (New York, NY, Russell & Russell, 1962)
