| > >
Copyright © Interdisciplinary Encyclopedia of Religion and Science.
No part of this article may be reproduced, stored in a retrievial system or transmitted without the prior permission of the Editors.
To refer to the content of this article, quote: INTERS – Interdisciplinary Encyclopedia of Religion and Science, edited by G. Tanzella-Nitti, P. Larrey and A. Strumia, http://www.inters.org
Pontifical
Academy of Sciences
Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo
I. The Nature and Goals of the Academy
- II. A Historical Survey: from the “Accademia dei Lincei” to the
Contemporary Pontifical Academy of Sciences - III. The Role of the
Academy in the Dialogue between Scientific Thought and Christian
Faith.
I. The Nature and Goals of the Academy
The Pontifical Academy of Sciences has its origins in the
“Accademia dei Lincei” (The Academy of Lynxes) which was established
in Rome in 1603, under the patronage of Pope Clement VIII, by the
learned Roman Prince, Federico Cesi. The leader of this Academy
was the famous scientist, Galileo Galilei. It was dissolved after
the death of its founder but then recreated by Pope Pius IX in 1847
and given the name “Accademia Pontificia dei Nuovi Lincei” (The
Pontifical Academy of the New Lynxes). Pope Pius XI then re-founded
the Academy in 1936 and gave it its present name, bestowing upon
it statutes which were subsequently updated by Paul VI in 1976 and
by John Paul II in 1986. Since 1936 the Pontifical Academy of Sciences
has been concerned both with investigating specific scientific subjects
belonging to individual disciplines and with the promotion of interdisciplinary
co-operation. It has progressively increased the number of
its Academicians and the international character of its membership.
The Academy is an independent body within the Holy See and
enjoys freedom of research. Although its rebirth was the result
of an initiative promoted by the Roman Pontiff and it is under the
direct protection of the ruling Pope, it organises its own activities
in an autonomous way in line with the goals which are set out in
its statutes: «The Pontifical Academy of Sciences has as its goal
the promotion of the progress of the mathematical, physical and
natural sciences, and the study of related epistemological questions
and issues» (Statutes of 1976, art. 2, § 1). Its deliberations and
the studies it engages in, like the membership of its Academicians,
are not influenced by factors of a national, political or religious
character. For this reason, the Academy is a valuable source of
objective scientific information which is made available to the
Holy See and to the international scientific community.
Today, the work of the Academy covers six main areas: a)
fundamental science; b) the science and technology of global questions
and issues; c) science in favour of the problems of the Third World;
d) the ethics and politics of science; e) bioethics; and f) epistemology.
The disciplines involved are sub-divided into nine fields:
the disciplines of physics and related disciplines; astronomy; chemistry;
the earth and environment sciences; the life sciences (botany, agronomy,
zoology, genetics, molecular biology, biochemistry, the neurosciences,
surgery); mathematics; the applied sciences; and the philosophy
and history of sciences.
The new members of the Academy are elected by the body of
Academicians and are chosen from men and women of every race and
religion on the basis of the high scientific value of their activities
and their high moral profile. They are then officially appointed
by the Roman Pontiff. The Academy is governed by a President, appointed
from its members by the Pope, who is helped by a scientific Council
and by the Chancellor. Initially made up of eighty Academicians,
of whom seventy were appointed for life, in 1986 John Paul II raised
the number of members for life to eighty, side by side with a limited
number of Honorary Academicians chosen because they are highly qualified
figures, and others who are Academicians because of the posts they
hold, amongst whom: the Chancellor of the Academy, the Director
of the
Vatican Observatory, the Prefect of the Vatican Apostolic Library,
and the Prefect of the Vatican Secret Archive.
In conformity with the goals set out in its Statutes, the
Pontifical Academy of Sciences «a) holds plenary sessions of the
Academicians; b) organises meetings directed towards the progress
of science and the solution of technical-scientific problems
which are thought to be especially important for the development
of the peoples of the world; c) promotes scientific inquiries and
research which can contribute, in the relevant places and
organisations, to the investigation of moral, social and spiritual
questions; d) organises conferences and celebrations; e) is responsible
for the publication of the deliberations of its own meetings, of
the results of the scientific research and the studies of Academicians
and other scientists» (Statutes of 1976, art. 3, § 1). To this end,
traditional “study-weeks” are organised and specific 'working-groups'
are established. The headquarters of the Academy is the “Casina
Pio IV”, a small villa built by the famous architect Piero Ligorio
in 1561 as the summer residence of the Pope of the time. Surrounded
by the lawns, shrubbery and trees of the Vatican Gardens, frescoes,
stuccoes, mosaics, and fountains from the sixteenth century can
be admired within its precincts.
Every two years the Academy awards its “Pius XI Medal”, a
prize which was established in 1961 by John
XXIII. This medal is given to a young scientist who has distinguished
himself or herself at an international level because of his or her
scientific achievements. Amongst the publications of the Academy
reference should be made to three series: Scripta
Varia, Documenta, and Commentarii.
The most important works, such as for example the papers produced
by the study-weeks and the conferences, are published in the
Scripta Varia. In a smaller
format, the Documenta
series publishes the short texts produced by various activities,
as well as the speeches by the Popes or the declarations of the
Academicians on subjects of special contemporary relevance. The
Commentarii series contains
articles, observations and comments of a largely monographic character
on specific scientific subjects. The expenses incurred by the activities
of the Academy are met by the Holy See.
During its various decades of activity, the Academy has had
a number of Nobel Prize winners amongst its members, many of whom
were appointed Academicians before they received this prestigious
international award. Amongst these should be listed: Lord Ernest
Rutherford (Nobel Prize for Physics, 1908), Guglielmo Marconi (Physics,
1909), Alexis Carrel (Physiology, 1912), Max von Laue (Physics,
1914),
Max Planck (Physics, 1918), Niels Bohr (Physics, 1922),
Werner Heisenberg (Physics, 1932), Paul Dirac (Physics, 1933), Erwin
Schrödinger (Physics, 1933), Sir Alexander Fleming (Physiology,
1945), Chen Ning Yang (Physics, 1957), Rudolf L. Mössbauer (Physics,
1961), Max F. Perutz (Chemistry, 1962),
John Eccles (Physiology, 1963), Charles H.Townes (Physics, 1964),
Manfred Eigen and George Porter (Chemistry, 1967), Har Gobind Khorana
and Marshall W. Nirenberg (Physiology, 1968). Recent Nobel Prize
winners who have also been or are presently Academicians may also
be listed: Christian de Duve (Physiology, 1974), Werner Arber e
George E. Palade (Physiology, 1974), David Baltimore (Physiology,
1975), Aage Bohr (Physics, 1975), Abdus Salam (Physics, 1979), Paul
Berg (Chemistry, 1980), Kai Siegbahn (Physics, 1981), Sune Bergström
(Physiology, 1982), Carlo Rubbia (Physics, 1984), Rita Levi-Montalcini
(Physiology, 1986), John C. Polanyi (Chemistry, 1986), Jean-Marie
Lehn (Chemistry, 1987), Joseph E. Murray (Physiology, 1990), Gary
S. Becker (Economics, 1992), Paul J. Crutzen (Chemistry, 1995),
Claude Cohen-Tannoudji (Physics, 1997) and Ahmed H. Zewail
(Chemistry, 1999). Padre Agostino Gemelli (1878-1959), the
founder of the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart and President
of the Academy after its re-foundation until 1959, and Mons. Georges Lemaître (1894-1966), one of the fathers of contemporary
cosmology who held the office of President from 1960 to 1966, were
eminent Academicians of the past. Under the Presidency of the Brazilian
biophysicist Carlos Chagas and of his successor Giovanni Battista
Marini-Bettòlo, the Academy linked its activity of scientific
research to the promotion of peace and the progress of the peoples
of the world, and dedicated increasing attention to the scientific
and health care problems of the Third World. The Presidency of the
Academy is presently entrusted to the Italian physicist, Nicola
Cabibbo.
The goals and the hopes of the Academy, within the context
of the dialogue between science and faith, were expressed by Pius
XI (1922-1939) in the following way in the Motu
Proprio which brought about its re-foundation: «Amongst the
many consolations with which divine Goodness has wished to make
happy the years of our Pontificate, I am happy to place that of
our having being able to see not a few of those who dedicate themselves
to the studies of the sciences mature their attitude and their intellectual
approach towards religion. Science, when it is real cognition, is
never in contrast with the truth of the Christian faith. Indeed,
as is well known to those who study the history of science, it must
be recognised on the one hand that the Roman Pontiffs and the Catholic
Church have always fostered the research of the learned in the experimental
field as well, and on the other hand that such research has opened
up the way to the defence of the deposit of supernatural truths
entrusted to the Church. [...] We promise again, and it is our strongly-held
intention, that the “Pontifical Academicians”, through their work
and our Institution, work ever more and ever more effectively for
the progress of the sciences. Of them we do not ask anything else,
since in this praiseworthy intent and this noble work is that service
in favour of the truth that we expect of them» (“Acta Apostolicae
Sedis” 28 (1936), p. 427).
After more than forty years, John Paul II once again emphasised
the role and the goals of the Academy at the time of his first speech
to the Academicians which was given on November, 10, 1979 to commemorate
the centenary of the birth of
Albert Einstein: «The
existence of this Pontifical Academy of Sciences, with which Galileo
was associated in a certain way through the old institution which
preceded the present one to which eminent scientists belong today,
is a visible sign which manifests, without any form of racial or
religious discrimination, the deep harmony that can exist between
the truths of science and the truths of faith. [...] The universal
Church, the Church of Rome united with all those in the world, attaches
great importance to the function of the Pontifical Academic of Sciences.
The title “Pontifical” attributed to this Academy signifies, as
you know, the interest and support of the Church. These are manifested
in very different forms, of course, from those of ancient patronage,
but they are no less deep and effective. As the distinguished President
of your Academy, the late Mons. Lemaître, wrote: “Does the church
need science? Certainly not, the cross and the gospel are sufficient
for her. But nothing humane is alien to the Christian. How could
the church have failed to take the interest in the most noble of
the strictly human occupations: the search for truth? [...] Both
of them, (the believing scientist and the non-believing scientist)
endeavour to decipher the palimpsest of nature, in which the traces
of the various stages of the long evolution of the world are overlaid
on one another and confused. The believer has perhaps the advantage
of knowing that the enigma has a solution, that the underlying writing
is, when all is said and done, the work of an intelligent being,
therefore that the problem raised by nature has been raised in order
to be solved, and that its difficulty is doubtless proportionate
to the present or future capacity of mankind. That will not give
him, perhaps, new resources in his investigation, but it will contribute
to maintaining in him a healthy optimism without which a sustained
effort cannot be kept up for long” (O. Godart, M. Heller, Les
relations entre la science et la foi chez Georges Lemaître,
Pontificia Academia Scientiarum, “Commentarii”, vol. III, n. 21,
pp. 7 and 11)» (Discourse
to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, in ORWE 26.11.1979, p.
10; cf. also Papal Addresses
to the Pontifical academy of Sciences 1917-2002, 2003, pp. 243-244).
It was precisely in that speech that John Paul II formally
called on historians, theologians and scientists to examine again
in detail the Galileo case. And he asked them to do this «in loyal
recognition of wrongs from whatever side they come», in order «to
dispel the mistrust that still opposes, in many minds, a fruitful
concord between science and faith» (ibidem, ORWE 26.11.1979, p. 10; cf. Papal Addresses, pp. 241-242).
II. A Historical Survey: from the “Accademia dei Lincei”
to the Contemporary Pontifical Academy of Sciences
The historical itinerary of the Academy is summarised in
the articles written by Marini-Bettòlo (1986) and by Marchesi
(1988), and in broader fashion in the monograph by Régis Ladous
(1994). As was observed at the beginning of this paper, the roots
of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences are to be traced back to the
post-Renaissance epoch. Its origins go back to the ancient
Accademia dei Lincei, established in 1603 by Prince Federico Cesi
(1585-1630) when he had just reached the age of eighteen.
Cesi was a botanist and naturalist, the son of the Duke of Acquasparta,
and the member of a noble Roman family. Three other young men took
part in this initiative: Giovanni Heck, a Dutch physician aged twenty-seven;
Francesco Stelluti di Fabriano; and Anastasio de Filiis de Terni.
Thus it was that the first Academy dedicated to the sciences came
into being, and it took its place at the side of the other Academies
—of literature, history, philosophy and art— which had arisen in
the humanistic climate of the Renaissance. The example of Cesi and
of the group of scholars led by him was followed some years later
in other countries — the Royal Society was created in London in
1662 and the Académie des Sciences was established in France in
1666.
Although he looked back to the model of the Aristotelian-Platonic
Academy, his aim was altogether special and innovative. Cesi wanted
with his Academicians to create a method of research based upon
observation, experiment, and the inductive method. He thus called
this Academy 'dei Lincei' because the scientists which adhered to
it had to have eyes as sharp as lynxes in order to penetrate the
secrets of nature, observing it at both microscopic and macroscopic
levels. Seeking to observe the universe in all its dimensions, the
“Lincei” made use of the microscope (tubulus
opticus) and the telescope (perspicillus-occhialino)
in their scientific research, and extended the horizon of knowledge
from the extremely small to the extremely large. Federico bestowed
his own motto on the “Lincei”: minima
cura si maxima vis (take care of small things if you want to
obtain the greatest results).
The Cesi group was also interested in the new scientific
and naturalistic discoveries then coming from the New World, as
is demonstrated by the most significant works of the college of
the first “Lincei” — the Rerum
medicarum thesaurus novae Hispaniae, later known as the Tesoro
Messicano, which was printed in Rome in 1628. This was a very
extensive collection of new geographical and naturalistic knowledge,
and contained in addition accounts of explorations carried out in
the Americas.
From the outset the Academy had its ups and downs. A few
years after its foundation it was strongly obstructed by Cesi's
father because he believed that within it activity was being engaged
in which was not very transparent in character — for example, studies
in
alchemy. But after the death of Federico's father (1610), the abundant
economic resources which were now obtained thanks to Federico's
inheritance, as well as the fact that renowned scholars such as
Galileo Galilei, Giovan Battista della Porta, Fabio Colonna, and
Cassiano dal Pozzo joined its ranks, enabled the Academy to progress
and advance.
The religious character of the Academy cannot be overlooked.
It was placed under the protection of St. John the Evangelist who
was often portrayed in the miniatures of its publications with an
eagle and a lynx, both of which were symbols of sight and reason.
It was therefore conceived as an assembly of scholars whose goal
—as one can read in its Rules, described as the “Linceografo”— was
«knowledge and wisdom of things to be obtained not only through
living together with honesty and piety, but with the further goal
of communicating them peacefully to men without causing any harm».
Nature was seen not only as a subject of study but also of contemplation.
Amongst the suggestions of the “Linceografo” there is also that
of preceding study and work with prayer — «for this reason the Lynxes,
near to doing anything at all, must first raise their minds to God,
and humbly pray to him and invoke the intercession of the saints»
(cf. di Rovasenda and Marini-Bettòlo, 1986, p. 18). Amongst
the practices of the spiritual piety of the members there was the
reciting of the liturgical office of the Blessed Virgin Mary and
the Davidic Psalter. For this reason, as Enrico di Rovesanda observes,
«the religious inspiration of the Lincei cannot be overlooked, as
is done in many quarters, nor can it be reduced to an “almost mystical
glow of the school of Pythagoras”, as has also been suggested. The
high moral figure of Cesi acts to guarantee the sincere
and loyal profession of its religious faith» (ibidem,
p. 19). One of the mottoes of the Academy, Sapientiae
cupidi, indicated the striving for constant research into truth
through scientific speculation, based upon the mathematical and
natural sciences but always located within a sapiential horizon.
Like Galileo, whose great supporter he was, Cesi admired
Aristotle but not the Aristotelians of the University of Padua who
had refused to look at things through the telescope of the Pisan
scientist. He was in addition rather critical of the university
culture of his day. Federico Cesi also engaged in important activity
of mediation between the Roman theological world and Galileo, reaching
the point of advising the latter to not insist in his polemics about
the interpretation of Holy Scripture so that he could dedicate himself
in a more effective way to scientific research. Death struck Cesi
down in 1630 when Galileo was about to finish his Dialogo sui Massimi Sistemi (Dialogue on the Two Chief World Systems)
the manuscript of which Galileo wanted to send to Cesi himself so
that the latter could organise its publication. After Cesi's death
the activities of the Academy diminished to such an extent as to
bring about its closure.
The first attempts to bring the “Lincei” back into existence
took place in 1745 in Rimini as a result of the efforts of a group
of scientists belonging to the circle made up of Giovanni Paolo
Simone Bianchi (known as Janus Plancus), Stefano Galli and Giuseppe
Garampi. But the new Academy had a very short life. The attempt
at re-foundation made by Padre Feliciano Scarpellini (1762-1840)
in Rome at the beginning of the nineteenth century met with greater
success. He gave the name of “Lincei” to a private academy that
he had established in 1795. Despite a lack of funds and a whole
series of difficulties, Scarpellini managed to keep the name of
'Lincei' alive and to bring together in a single academic body the
various scientists working in the Papal States such as the mathematician
Domenico Chelini, the naturalist Carlo Bonaparte, the anatomist
Alessandro Flajani, the chemists Domenico Morichini and Pietro Peretti,
Prince Baldassarre Odescalchi, the physicists Gioacchino Pessuti
and Paolo Volpicelli, and the physician Benedetto Viale (cf. Marini-Bettòlo,
1986, p. 10).
The authorities of the Papal States took new practical initiatives
to re-found the Academy during the first half of the nineteenth
century in response to the wishes of Pope Pius VII (1800-1823)
and Leo XII (1823-1829), with the allocation of the second
floor of Palazzo Senatorio in Capidoglio to the Academy as its headquarters.
But in 1847 it was Pius IX who officially renewed the Academy with
the name (which had already been suggested by Gregory XVI in 1838)
of “Accademia Pontificia dei Nuovi Lincei” (The Pontifical Academy
of the New Lynxes), ensuring the drawing up of new statutes which
envisaged, amongst other things, the presence of thirty resident
members and forty correspondent members. During this period of activity
famous astronomers and priests were present within its ranks, such
as Francesco de Vico and
Angelo Secchi. During the revolutionary upheavals of 1848 the Roman
Republic sought to expel the Academy from the Campidoglio. However,
the institution managed to keep its headquarters by using various
bureaucratic manoeuvres. In 1870, following the fall of the independent
Papal States and the unification of the Kingdom of Italy, the Academy
divided into two different institutions: the “Reale Accademia dei
Lincei”, which later became the present Accademia Nazionale dei
Lincei with its headquarters in Palazzo Corsini alla Lungara, and
the “Accademia Pontificia dei Nuovi Lincei”, which was transferred
from the Capidoglio to the Casina Pio IV villa in the Vatican Gardens.
One had to wait, as has already been observed, until 28 October
1936 for a further renewal of the institution, which took place
in response to the insistent requests of the Jesuit Giuseppe Gianfranceschi.
This scientist was Professor of Physics at the Gregorian University
and had been the President of the Accademia Pontificia dei Nuovi
Lincei since 1921. A new Pontifical Academy of Sciences was thus
created by Pope Pius XI by the Motu Proprio In
Multis Solaciis (for an Italian translation see Marini-Bettòlo,
1987, pp. 199-203. This work has an accurate summary of the
life of the Academy for the years 1936-1986; partial English
translation in Papal Addresses, 2003, p. 20). The Presidency was entrusted to the
Rector of the Catholic University Padre, Agostino Gemelli, who was
flanked by the Chancellor, Pietro Salviucci, and by a Council composed
of four Academicians. Annual (and later two-yearly) plenary
sessions were proposed for all the Academicians. The accounts of
the activities and the contributions of the members were published
in the Acta Pontificiae Academiae
Scientiarum and later on in the Commentationes. The first assembly was inaugurated on June, 1st, 1937
by the then Cardinal Secretary of State, Eugenio Pacelli, the future
Pope Pius XII. In discussing this period of the Academy reference
should be made to the presence of such distinguished members as
Ugo Armaldi, Giuseppe Armellini, Niels Bohr, Lucien Cuenot, Georges
Lemaître, Tullio Levi-Civita, Guglielmo Marconi, Robert Millikan,
Umberto Nobile, Max Planck, Ernest Rutherford, Erwin Shrödinger,
Francesco Severi, Edmund Whittaker, and Pieter Zeeman.
During the years 1937-1946 the publications of the
Academy had a largely Italian character, presenting, for example,
the work of the Italian Academicians Pistolesi, Crocco, and Nobile
on aerodynamics. But there were also papers by foreign Academicians
such those as by E. Schrödinger in 1937 on quantum physics and by
M. Tibor in 1937-1939 of an astronomical character. During
the Second World War the Academy greatly reduced its activity but
nonetheless found space for the publications of Jewish Italian scientists
who had been marginalised by the race laws of 1938, amongst whom
should be mentioned a group of mathematicians of Jewish descent
including Tullio Levi-Civita and Vito Volterra, and others
such as Giuseppe Levi, Rita Levi-Montalcini, E. Foà and G.S.
Coen. Pius XII (1939-1958), who succeeded Pius XI, did not
fail to make addresses to the Academicians, even during the war
years, such as the address of November, 30, 1941 on the occasion
of the inauguration of the fourth academic year. This address was
dedicated to a long and profound reflection on the position of man
in relation to the Creation and God (cf. Discorsi
e Radiomessaggi, III, pp. 271-281; cf. also Papal Addresses, pp. 91-99).
In the post-war period, at a time of sensitive reconstruction
and the rebuilding of international relations, in the face of the
great difficulties encountered at the level of scientific contacts
and exchange, the Academy undertook the publication of the research
results of greatest interest of the various fields of science which
had been achieved during the war in its work Relationes
de Auctis Scientiis tempore belli (aa. 1939-1945). This
publication was of marked importance in fostering the renewal of
scientific contacts between the nations which had previously been
at war. In 1946 Alexander Fleming (1881-1955) was appointed
an Academician in recognition of his discovery of penicillin -
a discovery which opened the way to the pharmacological production
of antibiotics.
During the 1950s, in parallel with the problems of reconstruction
and the development of under-developed regions, the activity
of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences centred around the questions
and issues of applied science. In 1955 the study-week on trace
elements was held, when for the first time the problem of agrarian
production and food sources was addressed. After the election to
the papacy of John XXIII (1958), Padre Gemelli died in 1959. The
Presidency of the Academy was then held by Georges Lemaître.
The 1960s witnessed an exponential growth and development
of science connected with electronics and the conquest of space.
This gave new impetus to industry and technological advance but
also to nuclear armaments. In astrophysics the discovery of new
sensors and the development of radio-astronomy opened up the universe
to new interpretations. Biology became directed towards the molecular
study of genetics. In 1961 the Pontifical Academy of Sciences organised a study-week
on the macromolecules of interest to biology, and in particular
on the nucleoproteins, a subject which was then of major importance
for international research. On that occasion, when meeting the Academicians,
John XXIII reaffirmed the educational and cultural mission of the
Church and the function of scientific progress in relation to the
positive appreciation of the human person. The Pope recalled in
addition that science is directed above all else towards the development
and growth of the personality of man and the glorification of God
the Creator: «indeed, far from fearing the most daring discoveries
of mankind, the Church believes, on the contrary, that any progress
in the possession of truth brings forth a broadening of the human
person and constitutes an advance towards the primary Truth as well
as a glorification of the creative work of God» (Discourse
on occasion of the XXV anniversary of the Academy, 30.10.1961,
in “Discorsi, Messaggi e Colloqui del Santo Padre Giovanni XXIII”,
vol. III, p. 493; cf. also Papal Addresses, p. 166). In 1962, at the time of the plenary session
of that year, a study-week dedicated to astronomy which addressed
the subject of cosmic radiation in space was held, guided in first
person by the President of the Academy, Monsignor Lemaître.
In 1964, at the time of the pontificate of Paul VI (1963-1978),
there appeared amongst the publications of the Pontifical Academy
of Sciences the Miscellanea Galileiana of Monsignor Pio Paschini, who was Professor
of History at the Lateran University. The Galileo case was slowly
reopened, a development favoured by the reference made to it by
Vatican Council II in n. 36 of Gaudium
et Spes. This led to the address by John Paul II of 1979 to
which reference has already been made. After the death of Georges
Lemaître, in 1966 P. Daniel O'Connell was made President of the
Academy. A Jesuit and Irish astronomer, he had previously been Director
of the Vatican Observatory and had been an Academician for life
since 1964. He was also the author together with other astronomers
of an important general atlas of the stars. The year 1967 was marked
by the publication of the encyclical Populorum
Progressio, in which Paul VI brought to worldwide attention
all the major problems inherent in the development of the Third
World. This document also contained an appeal to engage in international
scientific co-operation so that this could in all forms favour
developing countries. It introduced the idea that scientific progress
and advance must be guided by a “new humanism”: «every advance of
ours, each one of our syntheses reveals something about the design
which presides over the universal order of beings, the effort of
man and humanity to progress. We are searching for a new humanism,
which will allow modern man to refind himself, taking on the higher
values of love, friendship, prayer and contemplation» (n. 20). In
harmony with the themes of the encyclical, the Academy thought it
was necessary to open itself to collaboration with the scientists
of the Third World and by 1968 it was already holding a study-week
on the subject of 'organic matter and soil fertility', a subject
which dealt with the applications of science to agricultural production
and the solution of the problems of hunger in the world.
In 1972 for the first time a layman was elected President
— the Brazilian Carlos Chagas, who had already been a member of
the United Nations and the General Secretary of the first conference
of the United Nations on Science and Technologies for Development.
The new President imparted a new direction to the activities of
the Academy which were now more centred around solving the great
problems of post-industrial society (cf. di Rovesanda, 2000). The
scientific activity of the Academy was thus directed not only towards
the subjects of science which were more specific to Western culture
but also began to be concerned, with the co-operation of Giovanni
Battista Marini-Bettòlo (who succeeded Chagas in 1988), with the
scientific and health care problems connected with the growth and
development of the Third World (
ETHICS AND DEVELOPMENT).
The 1980s witnessed the development of new directions in
scientific research which moved in the direction of the life sciences
(
BIOLOGY), the earth sciences (
GEOLOGY) and ecology. Mankind had to face up to new problems, such as pollution, changes
in the biosphere, energy reserves, and genetic manipulation. In
1982 the Academy committed itself at an international level to the
promotion of peace with the drawing up of a document on nuclear
armaments (cf. Declaration
on Nuclear Disarmament, EV, 7, 1811-1825) and devoted the next
plenary session (of 1983) to the subject of “Science for peace”.
In connection with that event, John Paul II appealed to members
of governments to work in an effective fashion in order to remove
the danger of a new war and invited States to engage in nuclear
disarmament (cf. Science in
the Service of Peace, 12.11.1983, in Papal
Addresses, pp. 257-263). This document and appeal achieved a
strong resonance in the United States of America and the Soviet
Union. During the 1990s meetings and study-weeks were held which
were dedicated to analysing the question of the prolonging of life;
the question of determining the moment of
death; the question of
transplants and xenografts; and the question of sustainable growth
and development. The issues of artificial fertilisation, cloning,
and genetic manipulation were also considered. These were subjects
which increasingly involved issues of an ethical character (
BIOETHICS) and which drew scientists, philosophers and theologians
into dialogue. Although the usual practice of involving various
disciplines was maintained, the research and the debates of the
Academicians were directed in a special way towards reflection on
the anthropological and humanistic dimensions of science. In November
1999 a working-group was held on the subject of “Science for Man
and Man for Science”, and the Jubilee session of November 2000 was
dedicated to the subject “Science and the Future of Mankind”.
III. The Role of the Academy in the Dialogue between Scientific
Thought and Christian Faith
In the relations which exist between Academies and the States
in which they carry out their activities, the case of the Pontifical
Academy of Sciences can be seen as a singular case, as indeed in
basic terms the role of the small State which hosts it is also singular.
During these long years this relationship has become very fertile.
The Church has paid careful attention to the Academy. She has respected
its work and fostered the autonomy of its scientific and organisational
dynamics. Through the Academy, the
Magisterium of the Church has sought to make the scientific world
understand her teaching and her orientations in relation to subjects
which concern the good of man and society, the complete human development
of all the peoples of the world, and the scientific and cultural
co-operation which should animate the relations between States.
On the occasion of numerous addresses and messages directed towards
the Academy by five pontiffs, the Church has been able to repropose
the meaning of the relationship between faith and reason, between
science and wisdom, and between love for truth and the search for
God. But through the Academy the Church has also been able to understand
from nearer to hand, with speed and in depth, the contents and the
importance of numerous questions and issues which have been the
object of the reflection of the scientific world, whose consequences
for society, the environment and the lives of individuals could
not but interest her directly, «given that there is nothing which
is genuinely human which does not find echo in her heart» (Gaudium et Spes, 1). The Pontifical Academy of Sciences has thus become
one of the favoured forums
for the dialogue between the Gospel and scientific culture, gathering
together all the stimulating provocations but also the inspiring
possibilities that such dialogue brings with it, almost thereby
symbolising a shared growth —of both the scientific community and
the Magisterium of the Church— of their respective responsibilities
towards truth and good.
The above survey, although general in character, dealing
with the activity carried out over the sixty years since the foundation
of the Pontifical Academy of Science, the subjects of the numerous
meetings and study-weeks, and the publications which the Academy
has produced, brings out all the contemporary relevance and the
importance of the subjects which have been addressed. Scientists
from all over the world, often co-operating closely with a
group of philosophers and theologians, have examined questions and
issues which have ranged from genetics to cosmology, from agriculture
to the distribution of resources, from the surgery of transplants
to the history of science, and from ecology to telecommunications.
The speeches addressed by the Pontiffs to the Academicians, from
Pius XI to John Paul II, have offered important elements of reflection
not only in relation to the ethical and moral responsibility of
their activities but also on the very meaning of scientific research,
and on its striving for truth and an increasingly profound knowledge
of reality. The subject of the relationship between science and
faith, both at an epistemological and an anthropological level,
has been the usual framework of almost all these papal addresses.
The forms of language employed have been different as these decades
have passed, and different emphases have been placed on the various
questions and issues, but the attention paid to scientific work
has been unchanging, as has been the case in relation to the philosophical
and cultural dimensions which that work involves.
Side by side with such dialogue, which we could call “ordinary
dialogue”, international public opinion has been witness to certain
“out of the ordinary” events. From the mass media it has learnt
about speeches of special importance for the relationship between
science and faith, speeches given at the Academy in particular during
the pontificate of John Paul II. Of these reference should be made
to the address with which, as has already been observed (see above,
I), John Paul II spoke to the plenary session of the Pontifical
Academy of Sciences in November 1979 to express his wish for, and
then formally request, the establishment of a committee of historians,
scientists, and theologians which would re-examine the Galileo case
and present public opinion with a serene analysis of the facts as
they occurred. The aim of this was not in a historical sense to recognise
the inadvisability of the condemnation of the heliocentrism carried
out four centuries beforehand by the Sant'Uffizio (something which
had already been effected in 1757 with the removal of the works
in question from the list of prohibited books), but rather to ensure
that the historical-philosophical context of the episode, as well
as its implications at a cultural level, were more illuminated,
thereby clarifying in a public way which would be comprehensible
to everybody what had already been made clear in a narrower circle
of intellectuals and experts. During a new assembly of the Academy
which was held on October, 31, 1992, Cardinal Paul Poupard, in the
presence of the Holy Father, presented the results of the committee
and commented on the work which it had carried out (cf. Poupard,
1994).
Four years later, on October, 22, 1996, this time in the
form of a message on the occasion of the sixtieth anniversary of
its re-foundation, John Paul II once again chose the Pontifical
Academy of Sciences as a qualified interlocutor to expound certain
important reflections on the theory of evolution (
MAGISTERIUM OF CATHOLIC CHURCH,
V.2; MAN, ORIGIN AND NATURE, V.3). Returning to and developing
certain observations made by his predecessor Pius XII in the encyclical
Humani Generis (cf. DH
3896-3899), he now added that «new knowledge leads the theory of
evolution to be no longer considered as a mere hypothesis», thereby
recognising «that this theory has progressively imposed itself on
the attention of researchers following a series of discoveries made
in the various disciplines of knowledge», imposing itself also therefore
on the attention of theologians and
bible experts (
NATURAL SCIENCES IN THE WORK OF THEOLOGIANS,
IV; cf. Message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, “Magisterium is concerned with questions of evolution,
for it involves conception of man”, 22.10.1996, ORWE 30.10.1996,
pp. 3 and 7).
It would not however be exact to confine only to recent years
the climate of mutual listening and serene encounter on subjects
of great relevance. History has also been a witness to other episodes
of intense dialogue with the Roman Pontiffs of which the Academy
or some of its members were the protagonists. This is the case,
for example, of Max Planck, who wanted to make himself the interpreter
in a direct way with Pius XII in 1943 of the risks of war connected
with the use of armaments based upon nuclear fission (cf. Ladous,
1994, p. 144), or the close relationship between Pius XII and Georges
Lemaître, who enabled the Pontiff to understand from closer to hand
at the beginning of the 1950s the meaning of the new cosmological
models which were by then beginning to become established in the
scientific world, and the philosophical, or even theological, questions
which at first sight appeared to be involved. In more recent years, Carlos Chagas was especially
concerned in 1981 to take on board the worries of John Paul II,
who was still convalescing after the attack on his life, about the
consequences for the planet of a possible nuclear war. He decided
to himself present the studies carried out on the subject to the
principal Heads of State in his capacity as President of the Academy
(cf. di Rovesanda, 2000).
In the letter sent to Padre George Coyne, the Director of
the Vatican Observatory and a member of the Council of the Academy,
a document which is certainly one of the most profound there is
on the subject of the dialogue between science and faith, John Paul
II observed that science has acted to purify faith and that faith
has acted to generate scientific research, a truth demonstrated
by the fact that Galilean modern science was born in a Christian
climate with the increasing assimilation of the message of freedom
placed in the heart of man. Thus, in the same letter, referring
to the wider context of universities, the Pope declared that: «The
Church and the Academy engage one another as two very different
but major institutions within human civilization and world culture.
We bear before God enormous responsibilities for the human condition
because historically we have had and continue to have a major influence
on the development of ideas and values and on the course of human
action» ( Letter to the Director of the Vatican Observatory , 1.6.1988, in Papal Addresses , pp. 292-293). For this to come about, the Pope stressed
the importance of there being experts and places especially dedicated
to such a dialogue: «The Church long ago recognized the importance
of such links by establishing the Pontifical Academy of Sciences,
in which some of the world’s leading scientists meet together regularly
to discuss their researches and to convey to the larger community
where the directions of discovery are tending. But much more is
needed» (ibidem, p. 299).
And in this “more” John Paul II saw the need, in their irreplaceable
dialogue, for scientific institutions and the Catholic Church not
to think in a reductive way about the settling of ancient conflicts,
and also saw the more important need for mutual help in the investigation
of truth and a shared growth in their responsibility for the good
of the peoples of the world and their future. And it in this logic,
with this new readiness to engage in service, that the present President
of the Academy, Professor Cabibbo, in his address to John Paul II
on the occasion of the Jubilee plenary session on the subject of
“Science and the future of Mankind” (cf. Papal
Addresses, pp. 385-388) was able to speak about the “renewed
commitment” of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences together with
the Holy See to the good of the whole Church, of the scientific
community, and of those men and women who search and believe.
Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo
See also: DIALOGUE,
SCIENCE AND THEOLOGY; VATICAN OBSERVATORY.
Documents
of the Catholic Church related to the Subject:
Bibliography
Studies and works of a historical character:
E. DI ROVASENDA, G.B. MARINI-BETTÒLO, Federico
Cesi nel quarto centenario della nascita, “Pontificiae Academiae
Scientiarum Scripta Varia” 63 (1986); G.B. MARINI-BETTÒLO,
Historical Aspects of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, “Pontificae
Academiae Scientiarum Documenta” 21 (1986); G.B. MARINI-BETTÒLO, L'attività
della Pontificia Accademia delle scienze 1936-1986, “Pontificiae
Academiae Scientiarum Scripta Varia” 71 (1987); G. MARCHESI, La
Pontificia Accademia delle scienze, luogo d’incontro tra ragione
e fede, “Civiltà Cattolica” 139 (1988), III, pp. 235-246; R.
LADOUS, Des Nobel au Vatican.
La fondation de l’académie
pontificale des sciences,
Cerf, Paris 1994; P. POUPARD (ed.), Après
Galilée. Science
et foi: nouveau dialogue, Desclée, Paris 1994; E.
DI ROVASENDA, In ricordo
dell’antico Presidente della Pontifica Accademia delle Scienze,
C. Chagas, in OR 21-22.2.2000, p. 7.
Discourses of the Popes: Discourses
of the Popes from Pius XI to John Paul II to the Pontifical Academy
of Sciences (1936-1986), “Pontificiae Academiae Scientiarum
Scripta Varia” 66 (1986); Papal
Addresses to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (1917-2002) and
to the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences /1994-2002), “Pontificiae
Academiae Scientiarum Scripta Varia”, n. 100, Città del Vaticano
2003.
Some publications of the Academy on subjects
referred to in this article: P. PASCHINI (ed.), Miscellanea galileana, 3 voll. “Pontificiae Academiae Scientiarum
Scripta Varia” 27 (1964); “Science
and Technology for Developing Countries, “Pontificiae Academiae
Scientiarum Scripta Varia” 44 (1979); S.M. PAGANO, A.G. LUCIANI,
I documenti del processo di
Galileo Galilei, “Pontificiae Academiae Scientiarum Scripta
Varia” 53 (1984); The Artificial
Prolongation of Life and the Determination of the Exact Moment of
Death, “Pontificiae Academiae Scientiarum Scripta Varia” 60
(1986); Discorsi indirizzati
dai Sommi Pontefici Pio XI, Pio XII, Giovanni XXIII, Paolo VI, Giovanni
Paolo II alla Pontificia Accademia delle Scienze dal 1936 al 1986,
“Pontificiae Academiae Scientiarum Scripta Varia” 64 (1986); The
Responsibility of Science, “Pontificiae Academiae Scientiarum
Scripta Varia” 80 (1990); Science
for Development in a Solidarity Framework, “Pontificiae Academiae
Scientiarum Documenta” 25 (1990); The
Determination of Brain Death and its Relationship to Human Death,
“Pontificiae Academiae Scientiarum Scripta Varia” 83 (1992); Science
in the Context of Human Culture I-II, “Pontificiae Academiae
Scientiarum Scripta Varia” 85-86 (1994-1997); Discorsi
dei Papi alla Pontificia Accademia delle Scienze (1936-1993),
Pontificia Academia Scientiarum, Città del Vaticano 1994; The Legal and Ethical Aspects Related to the Project of the Human Genome,
“Pontificiae Academiae Scientiarum Scripta Varia” 91 (1995). For
all the publications of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences see Publication
of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (1936-1999), Città del
Vaticano 1999.
|