# The Catholic Church and the Scientific Method **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 2, 2010, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-catholic-church-and-the-scientific-method/559234 "2010-11-02T17:31:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![dangermom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e274bd/32.png) [@dangermom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dangermom)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2010, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-catholic-church-and-the-scientific-method/559234/21 "2010-11-03T18:59:20Z")
I don’t know much about it, but I believe that [Scholasticism](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholasticism) is supposed to have had something to do with it. The idea that people could get together and argue logically about an issue and have to provide evidence for it eventually developed into the scientific method, I guess? Also, people will say that scholarly things in general were under the protection of the Church in Europe for a long time, and monks were the only ones copying texts, gathering information for encyclopedias of all knowledge, etc. ---
**Author:** ![SlowMindThinking](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@SlowMindThinking](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlowMindThinking)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2010, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-catholic-church-and-the-scientific-method/559234/22 "2010-11-03T19:18:45Z")
> [@Kiber](#): > > Thanks everyone for your responses - this has been very informative. I guess if I were to summarize - the best one could say about the Catholic Church is that, of the many people who contributed to development of the Scientific Method, some of them were Catholic. Is that about it? > > I guess another question would be - are there any examples of the Catholic Church actively promoting scientific endeavors or research? And could those have contributed in some way to development of the scientific method? Most of what I can find discussing the Church and science focuses on how the Church responded to science, not promoted science. For example, how the Church responded to carbon dating, evolution, medical science/research, etc. > > FYI - I’m not trying to support any agenda here. I’m just trying to figure out what the Church must be using to support it’s own position. I think OldGuy is too dismissive of the Catholic Church’s role with Roger Bacon, but I’m no historian of him. He was not merely a Catholic. I can say that he not only was a Franciscan Friar, but that he taught at the Catholic University of the day - Paris. Given that the Pope explicitly asked him to write on the role of philosophy within religion, in order so that he could present his thoughts (thoroughly informed by Aristotle, btw), I would say the Catholic Church can lay some claim to “inventing” the scientific method. I would more or less agree with njtt, but in our simplistic, sound bite world, they can lay as much claim as any. I believe they can also claim to promoting science, at least a bit. I know they founded and ran some of the earliest universities, such as Paris. What education was available prior to that in Europe was almost purely through them. They also have at least one observatory, currently. I know Gregor Mendel was a monk, and that they condemned neither evolution nor genetics. I also know they never officially recognized evolution until just a few years ago. Beyond that, I can’t help you much. ---
**Author:** ![thelurkinghorror](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7c8e57/32.png) [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2010, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-catholic-church-and-the-scientific-method/559234/23 "2010-11-03T20:19:47Z")
> [@Kiber](#): > > Thanks everyone for your responses - this has been very informative. I guess if I were to summarize - the best one could say about the Catholic Church is that, of the many people who contributed to development of the Scientific Method, some of them were Catholic. Is that about it? > > I guess another question would be - are there any examples of the Catholic Church actively promoting scientific endeavors or research? And could those have contributed in some way to development of the scientific method? Most of what I can find discussing the Church and science focuses on how the Church responded to science, not promoted science. For example, how the Church responded to carbon dating, evolution, medical science/research, etc. > > FYI - I’m not trying to support any agenda here. I’m just trying to figure out what the Church must be using to support it’s own position. Sorry to shotgun a bunch of Wikipedia links. Evolution has been covered many times on the SDMB, suffice it to say that at least Pius XII and John Paul II have spoken favorably about evolution. Here is the [wikipedia page](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution). Some Catholics are against it, but the majority at least favor it, and pretty much every Catholic school biology class teaches evolutionary theory as fact. Pius XII was in favor of the Big Bang, and felt it fitted religious interpretation. The theory was created by priest: [Religious interpretations of the Big Bang theory - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_interpretations_of_the_Big_Bang_theory) As far as active science, there is the [Pontifical Academy of Sciences](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifical_Academy_of_Sciences) and the [Vatical Observatory](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_Observatory). ---
**Author:** ![OldGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/3bc359/32.png) [@OldGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2010, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-catholic-church-and-the-scientific-method/559234/24 "2010-11-03T20:55:14Z")
> [@SlowMindThinking](#): > > I think OldGuy is too dismissive of the Catholic Church’s role with Roger Bacon, but I’m no historian of him. He was not merely a Catholic. I can say that he not only was a Franciscan Friar, but that he taught at the Catholic University of the day - Paris. Given that the Pope explicitly asked him to write on the role of philosophy within religion, in order so that he could present his thoughts (thoroughly informed by Aristotle, btw), I would say the Catholic Church can lay some claim to “inventing” the scientific method. Nor am I an historian and I don’t know that we could ever enough evidence one way or the other, but my point was that Catholics may well have provided some to a lot of the development of modern scientific thought and procedures, but I see no evidence that Catholicism did very much. Yes they founded universities, and I don’t know how much credit to give there, but there seems to be some compelling information in the other way. I don’t give credit for not persecuting Mendel – not persecuting should be the standard. I do blame for arresting Galileo and Bacon. (Even if the former was a jerk.) That does smack of an anti-science or anti-scientific mindset certainly compared to the attitude of the Muslims at the time. Maybe I just know more European history so I know more of the dark points. As far as Bacon goes, his contributions seem to have their origins from before becoming a friar. (Of course he was already Catholic – essentially everyone in Western Europe was then.) The Pope picked him to write because he was already noted as being a scholar and was now a friar (and he knew him). He needed both qualifications Would I rather have lived under Catholic or Muslim rule back then? I have no idea. Certainly there were good and bad points of each, but it’s hard to imagine European scientific progress wouldn’t have been faster Muslim rule – unless it has nothing t do with religion and all to do with inherent differences in the people of those two cultures, and I don’t think that’s the case. ---
**Author:** ![OldGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/3bc359/32.png) [@OldGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2010, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-catholic-church-and-the-scientific-method/559234/25 "2010-11-03T21:00:25Z")
> [@thelurkinghorror](#): > > Sorry to shotgun a bunch of Wikipedia links. > > Evolution has been covered many times on the SDMB, suffice it to say that at least Pius XII and John Paul II have spoken favorably about evolution. Here is the [wikipedia page](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution). Some Catholics are against it, but the majority at least favor it, and pretty much every Catholic school biology class teaches evolutionary theory as fact. > > Pius XII was in favor of the Big Bang, and felt it fitted religious interpretation. The theory was created by priest: [Religious interpretations of the Big Bang theory - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_interpretations_of_the_Big_Bang_theory) > > As far as active science, there is the [Pontifical Academy of Sciences](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifical_Academy_of_Sciences) and the [Vatical Observatory](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_Observatory). All of this seems irrelevant to the discussion which is about what went on long ago. The Pontifical Academy was founded within the last century. The Big Bang was proposed around the same time. The evolution debate probably has been gong on for a long time, but greatly heated up only in the 20th century. ---
**Author:** ![SlowMindThinking](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@SlowMindThinking](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlowMindThinking)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2010, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-catholic-church-and-the-scientific-method/559234/26 "2010-11-03T21:41:03Z")
> [@OldGuy](#): > > … Yes they founded universities, and I don’t know how much credit to give there, but there seems to be some compelling information in the other way. I don’t give credit for not persecuting Mendel – not persecuting should be the standard. I do blame for arresting Galileo and Bacon. (Even if the former was a jerk.) That does smack of an anti-science or anti-scientific mindset certainly compared to the attitude of the Muslims at the time. Maybe I just know more European history so I know more of the dark points. > > As far as Bacon goes, his contributions seem to have their origins from before becoming a friar. (Of course he was already Catholic – essentially everyone in Western Europe was then.) The Pope picked him to write because he was already noted as being a scholar and was now a friar (and he knew him). He needed both qualifications > > Would I rather have lived under Catholic or Muslim rule back then? I have no idea. Certainly there were good and bad points of each, but it’s hard to imagine European scientific progress wouldn’t have been faster Muslim rule – unless it has nothing t do with religion and all to do with inherent differences in the people of those two cultures, and I don’t think that’s the case. Just a couple of points, given that Mendel worked for the Catholic Church, you’d have to say they supported him. The problem is that no one, scientist included, paid much attention to Mendel at the time he did his experiments. The fact that he was doing experiments would seem to imply that they did support him. I see no evidence from the wikipedia article on him to indicate either that he adopted his position before becoming a friar or that he was persecuted for advocating science. It would be odd for him to have become a friar after adopting views that allegedly led to his persecution. That page, and something I vaguely recollect from a set of lectures, lead me to believe he was persecuted for advocating astrology (not astronomy!). Finally, I think I fall on the other side of your last statement. In part because I believe it was the fractured nature of European politics that led to the nurturing of science. It is relevant that monolithic empires, including the Roman and Chinese, did not develop science despite the presence of some true geniuses. At the risk of being a Marxist, the discovery of something new is always a threat to those in power, it is only those seeking to gain the upper hand who grasp the new with both hands. And in part, because the later Islamic rulers were positively oppressive and reactionary. The House of Islam had a great start, but devolved into something positively reactionary. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-catholic-church-and-the-scientific-method/559234.md?page=1)