Introduction to This Religions Special Issue: Natural Sciences as a Contemporary Locus Theologicus

Is science a gift to religion? If so, what does this gift entail? As we increasingly recognize that science and theology should not be viewed as competing models, some questions arise about how we can leverage the complementary benefits of these disciplines. This issue inspired us to undertake a new study, one which invited prominent theologians, philosophers, and scientists to contribute.

In April 2023, the editors of Religions asked us to propose a theme for a journal Special Issue covering research into the interaction between science and religion. We therefore chose contemporary science as the locus theologicus (theological place) for the issue’s theme and invited potential authors from various religious and theological traditions to contribute.

After around two years of work, we managed to gather 11 original articles, all of which underwent a rigorous review process involving many important, and sometimes ardent, discussions. This unique collection of articles sheds valuable light on the current state of research into contemporary science as a locus theologicus. The papers offer a variety of original proposals and approaches to the relationship between science and theology. These are unprecedented in the literature, so we believe they collectively represent a milestone in the discussion’s development. We also hope they will inspire further projects in the field of science–theology relations.

We initially thought that the theme of the Special Issue was not obvious. This is because the concept of loci theologici, including loci theologici alieni (secondary theological places), dates back to the post-Reformation theological tradition of the Catholic Church in the 16th century. Our intention, however, was to confront this ancient, late-Renaissance notion with the global state of contemporary theological reflection, which encompasses various religious traditions. In other words, we drew inspiration from this tradition and attempted to breathe new life into it. We also aimed to relate the historical theme of loci theologici to contemporary research on the interaction between these traditions and the sciences.

Our concerns were allayed over time, however. We received ten unique papers in total, not counting our joint article, demonstrating for the first time the importance of the sciences as loci theologici alieni for various religious and theological traditions. While the theme may have resonated most strongly with authors working within Catholicism, we were pleased to receive original and enriching contributions from authors within the Protestant (Ch. B. Kaiser), Orthodox (Ch. C. Knight), and Muslim (S. A. Malik) traditions.

What follows is a brief overview of the articles included in this collection, thus highlighting ideas that we believe deserve special attention due to their originality and contribution to the matter of religion’s interaction with science. Note that we grouped the works based on their subject matter. We finally conclude this review with a summary of this collective study and the conclusions that can be drawn from it.

1. The Role of Loci Theologici in the Interaction Between Science and Religion

Before discussing the articles’ subject matter, it is fitting to briefly explain the concept of loci theologici. In the context of Catholic theology, this concept appeared in a posthumous edition of a work by the 16th-century Dominican Melchior Cano that was titled De locis theologicis libri duodecim (About Theological Places, Twelve Books, Cano 1563). Cano organized these “places” (as sources of theology) according to the authority behind them. According to him, behind the loci theologici proprii (proper theological places) was the authority of God himself; he includes the Bible and the tradition of the Catholic Church within these. According to Cano, the loci theologici alieni (secondary places) also influence our understanding of divine revelation, but these are based on human authority. In his work that specifically concerned the eighth and ninth secondary theological places, the Spanish theologian wrote: “The eighth is the natural reason, which is most widely revealed through all the sciences discovered in the light of nature. The ninth is the authority of the philosophers, who follow nature as a guide (…)” (Cano 1563, p. 4).1 Thus, these loci were “natural reason” and “the authority of the philosophers” in reference to natural knowledge of the world (scientiae, philosophia). Cano adopted the concept of “locus” (“topos” in Greek) from Aristotle’s work Topics, which is a writing on logic in the broadest sense, the so-called Organon, so it is a tool of cognition. Aristotle’s topoi dealt with the principles of correct inference in cognitive processes. In developing his catalogue of loci theologici, Cano sought to organize the sources of argumentation and cognition specific to theology. It can be thought of as a compendium of meta-theological knowledge about how to construct and justify theological claims while maintaining the content and methodological standards of 16th-century science.

Contemporary literature for the concept of loci theologici is relatively limited, however. Notable studies include the works of authors like Chenu (1977), Körner (1994), Hünermann (2003), Mandreoli (2010), and Bafia (2018). When writing about “modern loci alieni,” contemporary German theologian Peter Hünermann proposed including the sciences among them, primarily due to their influence on the current worldview, something that is crucial for developing non-anachronistic theological interpretations (Hünermann 2003, pp. 228–29). For the Polish physicist and theologian Michael (Michał) Heller, it is not simply the methods and presuppositions of science that are loci theologici but rather “the whole of science” (Heller 2010, p. 42). Another Polish scientist, the logician and theologian Jerzy Dadaczyński, recently wrote that “science, to which reason refers, is the source of theological cognition” (Dadaczyński 2015, pp. 86–87 and footnote 14). It can therefore be concluded that these contemporary scholars advocate a maximalist approach to loci theologici alieni, including the modern sciences in their multifaceted forms (i.e., languages, theories, and methods).

In the first two articles, astronomer and theologian Giuseppe Tanzella–Nitti and theologian Christoph Böttigheimer consider the role and usefulness of the concept of loci theologici alieni in modern science and its relationship with religion, particularly Christianity. Tanzella–Nitti highlights an important development that occurred with the emergence of modern, mathematically based empirical sciences and the formation of a new image of nature. Indeed, the earlier theological depiction of nature as God’s work was superseded by mathematized knowledge of nature, with theology’s influence being minimized. From this perspective, the idea of loci theologici alieni being applied to our secular knowledge of the world also became problematic or superfluous. Tanzella–Nitti therefore highlights the need to overhaul the modern perception of this idea by developing a new theology of nature that draws on the latest scientific knowledge. At the same time, he emphasizes a broad understanding of science as a potential locus theologicus alienus, not only in terms of its theories and methods but also as a human and social enterprise. According to Tanzella–Nitti, this wider perspective enables the development of theological approaches that point to the salvific presence of the divine Logos/Word (i.e., the Second Person of the Trinity) within the realm of science.

In his article, Böttigheimer draws attention to the concept of loci theologici in Cano’s work, referring to them as domicilia, places of “residence” for the Word of God. In doing so, he subtly distinguishes between theological places (loci proprii) and places of theology (loci alieni). Like Tanzella–Nitti, Böttigheimer notes that when looking through the lens of modern science, it is very difficult to discern the activity of the Logos/Word in the world. Nevertheless, developing such a perspective is one of the most important intellectual tasks for theologians, who, in the case of Catholic theologians, have clear signposts from the most recent Church documents and papal teachings. Böttigheimer’s biblical-Christian conception of the world is presented through the perspective of the divine plans of creation and salvation. This vision portrays God’s active presence in the world (ontological domicilium), with theology corresponding to this on the cognitive–scientific level. Böttigheimer discusses several philosophical–theological approaches, inspired by the achievements of modern science in tackling this question.

2. Science as a Locus in Christian and Muslim Theology

Although we did not envisage the inclusion of purely historical articles in the issue, we did allow for the presentation of texts that provide examples from the history of theology and/or science when they connect to contemporary science and theology in terms of content or form. Notably, this section features works by authors from various religious traditions. For modern science, this demonstrates the potential for universalizing the concept of loci theologici alieni, despite it originating centuries ago in the Catholic tradition.

Zbigniew Liana, a philosopher and historian of science, considers three historical examples where theologians used certain criteria to accept scientific theories as loci theologici alieni, or in other words, potential influences on the reformulation of Christian doctrine. More specifically, these are the views of Robert Bellarmine on the Copernicus–Galileo heliocentric concept; Pope Pius XII on the theory of human evolution; and Pope John Paul II on the same theory. Liana analyzes how the aforementioned theologians used the categories of demonstration and hypothesis in relation to the aforementioned scientific theories. He points out the peculiar evolution of these meanings and comes to the important conclusion that not only can scientific theories be considered loci theologici but also the methodological tools used by theologians. In this manner, Cano’s original idea can be seen manifesting to some extent in the modern context.

The work of chemist and theologian Shoaib Ahmed Malik in this collection demonstrates how science, its achievements, and its methods can present a subject of analysis for theologians within and across religious traditions. Written from a Muslim perspective, Malik’s work discusses the relationship between religious doctrine and human knowledge, both scientific and philosophical, as presented by the 15th-century theologian and imam Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf al-Sanūsī’s in his work The Preliminaries of Theology (al-Muqaddimāt). Malik notes that al-Sanūsī’s works and the Ash῾arī theological tradition they represent are not treated in his article as an authoritative interpretation of Muslim doctrine but rather an exemplary framework for analyzing issues like God’s actions in the world, causality, and the possibility of miracles. These issues remain relevant to the relationship between Muslim theology and modern scientific knowledge.

The article by astrophysicist and theologian Christopher C. Knight presents modern science as a locus of theology from the perspective of Eastern Orthodox Christianity. Knight discusses his vision of theology by relating it to three issues, namely the understanding of natural theology, the relationship between the human mind and the Mind of God, and divine action. Knight’s work has two purposes: First, he seeks to demonstrate the differences between Western Christian theology (i.e., Protestant and Roman Catholic) and Eastern Christianity through these examples. Second, he discusses how Western theology has been enriched by the ideas of the Orthodox tradition. In doing so, Knight emphasizes the spiritual, mystical, and pneumatological dimensions of the latter tradition. Regarding the issue of divine action, Knight refers to the concept of the creator–savior presence in the world as the Logos of God, as developed by patristic theologian Maximus the Confessor.

Theologian Robert J. Woźniak’s work addresses the role of scientific imagination in theology and the corresponding role of theological imagination in science. In the former case, Michal Heller’s work serves as a guide to the history of the evolution of scientific imagination. The importance of scientific imagination as a locus of theology is especially evident in our image of the world, which is shaped mainly by science. Theology should accept this image, at least to some extent, to avoid being anachronistic. Woźniak also considers the potential impact of mathematics on theology, particularly with regard to the precision of argumentation and the imaginative dimension (e.g., Nicholas of Cusa’s theology). Historical examples of how elements of Christian doctrine have influenced secular knowledge may also be interesting, such as the Nicene Creed’s influence on concepts of time and space or the influence of the Cappadocian fathers’ Trinitarian theology on the ontology of relations.

Philosopher and theologian Kamil Trombik primarily focuses on the epistemological, ontological, and theological significance (locus theologicus) of the intriguing effectiveness of mathematized scientific methods for learning about nature. Trombik examines the views of the Kraków School of Philosophy in Science, a group of researchers inspired by Michal Heller’s work on this subject. A key aspect of the perspectives here is linking scientific endeavor to theological interpretation and connecting the mathematical nature of scientific cognition—or in stronger formulations, the mathematical nature of reality—to the concept of a rational Creator of the world or even a God-Mathematician. Trombik also notes, however, some limitations to the heuristic power of such a theological hypothesis. One possible issue is how the image of a God-Mathematician can be reconciled with the image of God as the source of the existential and axiological dimensions of human life.

3. Scientific Endeavor from the Theological Point of View

The final group of articles in this issue relates to how the sciences play the role of loci theologicus. Contemporary research on this topic has been inspired by the work of authors like Michal Heller (1996), Christopher B. Kaiser (1996), Tom McLeish (2014), and Paul Tyson (2022). Although the theology of science particularly relates to the phenomenon of science itself, the efficacy of its methods, and the values it assumes, the earlier articles in this issue demonstrate how science conceived as locus theologicus alienus can serve as a source of interesting forms of argumentation, useful methodological elements, and conceptual inspirations for theology.

The astrophysicist and theologian Christopher B. Kaiser wrote the opening article in this series. He addresses the issue of modern science as a sacred reminder. Kaiser applies Donald Walhout’s concept of a “sacred reminder,” which originally dealt with other religions, to remind people of forgotten or overlooked aspects of their own religion. According to Kaiser, science plays a similar role in Christian theology today. He demonstrates how reflections by renowned physicists John Archibald Wheeler and Stephen Hawking can advance theological reflection on God’s role in the world. Much like Woźniak, Kaiser points out that science (physics) allows for the expansion of imagination, something that theologians use. He points out how inspiration from modern physics can further Trinitarian theological reflection based on the exegesis of the New Testament and the writings of second-century Irenaeus of Lyon.

Another article by physicist and philosopher Dominique Lambert and philosopher Michał Oleksowicz indicates how the concept of intelligibility can serve as a means for theological reflection to stem from the sciences. This is because the concept necessarily assumes the sciences and can therefore facilitate mutual articulation or mediation (i.e., the proposed relationship between science and theology). The authors’ analysis focuses on the worldview where this mediation occurs. The article represents an interesting attempt to refine the conceptual worldview based on the analytical concept of language that was introduced by Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz of the Lvov–Warsaw School.

Astronomer and philosopher Tadeusz Sierotowicz then offers yet another perspective on science’s influence on theology by addressing it as an intertextual reading. Referring to Swiss theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar’s concept of three domains of truth, Sierotowicz points out that adopting “a third domain of truths that genuinely belong to creaturely nature yet do not emerge into the light of consciousness until they are illuminated by a ray of the supernatural” changes one’s perspective on the sciences. According to Sierotowicz, it is not the individual results but rather the theology of science itself—or in other words, the theological reflection on the scientific enterprise—that is the proper locus theologicus. Sierotowicz also presents an interesting analysis of the methodology and epistemology of the theology of science, referring in an original way to the results of the philosophy of science and the Midrash tradition.

The final article of philosophers and historians of science Jacek Rodzeń and Paweł Polak presents a comparative analysis of three concepts of the theology of science, as formulated by Michal Heller, Christopher B. Kaiser, and Tom McLeish. A notable aspect of their comparison is the use of Bonaventure’s 13th-century text De reductione artium ad theologiam as a reference point for theological reflection. Bonaventure’s Augustinian-based theology turns out to align well with contemporary proposals, much better than the still-dominant Thomistic proposal. Three areas of inspiration are highlighted, namely the concept of illumination (“a theological completion”), the question of exemplarism (“a Christology of science”), and reduction (“a theological teleology of science”). Turning to Bonaventure’s classical theology for inspiration in the theology of science provides an important theological complement to the other considerations presented in this collection and reveals further directions for exploration.

4. Conclusions and Research Perspectives

The articles in this collection demonstrate that religion cannot fulfill its role or uphold its values without engaging with contemporary intellectual culture. Likewise, culture cannot fully develop while ignoring the significance of religion or marginalizing its role. This mutual dependency is particularly evident in theology. While this discipline is based primarily on divine revelation, it cannot serve religious communities without considering their culture and knowledge of the current world. The articles collected here demonstrate the enduring value of the idea of loci theologici and show that its relevance extends beyond just one particular theology or religion. Cano’s loci theologici concept is an expression of this idea, a conviction that the tools and resources for acquiring and justifying knowledge represent an intellectual ecosystem for theology. We hope this volume will inspire further reflection on science as a locus theologicus.