In matters that are obscure and far beyond our vision, even in such as we may find treated in Holy Scripture, different Interpretations are sometimes possible without prejudice to the faith we have received. In such a case, we should not rush in headlong and so firmly take our stand on one side that, if further progress in the search of truth justly undermines this position, we too fall with it. That would be to battle not for the teaching of Holy Scripture but for our own, wishing its teaching to conform to ours, whereas we ought to wish ours to conform to that of Sacred Scripture.
I’m sure I’ve posted this before, but Augustine’s words here matter to us today because he secures for us a place for science (or, if you rather, the pursuit of truth) in examining our theology. Science can change, he admits, our interpretations and our theology. He also goes on to admonish the Christian who would profess to be wise and look rather stupid — you know, Ken Ham, Little Honey Tee Tee, T. Breeden — because he seeks to counter the settled science of the world. Augustine viewed the light of reason in this work as we must science — the great corrector or our idiocracy.
I, as a believer, see this as the goal of the Spirit who guides us into all Truth, re: John 14–16.
- Jay’s Analysis – Eastern Theology Versus Latin Theology (jaysanalysis.com)
- Scottish Journal of Theology (zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com)
- Francis and Augustine (pietistschoolman.com)
- St. John of Damascus and the Planck Satellite Telescope (II) (frted.wordpress.com)