Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Aquinas and the Big Bang ^ | November '97 | William E. Carroll

Posted on 01/27/2010 10:32:28 PM PST by Salvation

Aquinas and the Big Bang


Aquinas would have no difficulty accepting Big Bang cosmology, even with its recent variations, while also affirming the doctrine of creation out of nothing. He would, of course, distinguish between advances in cosmology and the philosophical and theological reflections on these advances.

One day a little boy asked his mother where he came from. His mother, pleased to have the opportunity to discuss such an important matter with her son, began by offering an elementary account of human biology, even introducing some references to the theory of evolution. Lest she restrict her analysis to the realm of the purely physical, she spoke of God's role in the creation of each human soul, and ultimately of God as the source of all that is. After she had finished, her young son, looking somewhat bemused, said to her that he had wondered about this because his friend next door had told him that he had come from Iowa.

The question of where we come from can be answered in many ways. We need to keep this fact in mind when we turn our attention to the account given by contemporary cosmology of the origins of the universe. The reigning theory among scientists today is that we live in the aftermath, or rather in the midst, of a giant explosion that began about fifteen billion years ago. Most cosmologists refer to the Big Bang as a "singularity," that is, an ultimate boundary or edge, a "state of infinite density" where space-time has ceased. Thus it represents an outer limit of what we can know about the universe since it is not possible to speculate, at least in the natural sciences, about conditions before or beyond the categories of space and time.

Nevertheless, in the past two decades some cosmologists have come to offer theories that account for the Big Bang itself as a fluctuation of a primal vacuum. Just as sub-atomic particles appear to emerge spontaneously in vacuums in laboratories, as the result of what is called "quantum tunneling from nothing," so the whole universe may be the result of a similar process. Other cosmologists, such as Stephen Hawking, contend that the notion of an initial "singularity" that seems to require a temporal beginning to the universe needs to be rejected. The universe, according to Hawking, does not have a boundary: "It is completely self-contained and not affected by anything outside itself." He thinks that the only way to have a scientific theory is if "the laws of physics hold everywhere, including at the beginning of the universe." For Hawking, contemporary quantum theory leads us to reject the very notion of such a privileged point as the beginning of the universe.

These recent variations in Big Bang cosmology have led some to wonder whether we are on the verge of a scientific explanation of the very origin of the universe. The contention of the new theories is that the laws of physics are sufficient to account for the origin and existence of the universe. If this be true, then, in a sense, we live in a self-creating universe that has sprung into existence spontaneously from a cosmic nothingness. Or, in Hawking's analysis, since the question of a beginning of the universe becomes meaningless, there is no role for a creator. As Quentin Smith, a philosopher of science, observes, if Big Bang cosmology is true "our universe exists without explanation. . . . It exists non-necessarily, improbably, and causelessly. It exists for absolutely no reason at all."

In such a self-sufficient universe, exhaustively understood in terms of the laws of physics, it would seem that there is no room for the God of Jewish, Christian, or Muslim revelation. The advances of modern science threaten to render traditional doctrines of creation and its Creator as intellectual artifacts from a less enlightened age. Perhaps the God of traditional theology is but a hypothesis now shown to be unnecessary.

Too often contemporary discussions about the relationship between science and religion suffer from an ignorance of history, and our question is an example. For we can save God and natural theology from the dustbins simply by turning to the sophisticated analyses of the natural sciences and creation that took place during the age of High Scholasticism. In the thirteenth century, brilliant scholars such as Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas wrestled with the implications for Christian theology of the most advanced science of their day — namely, the works of Aristotle and his Muslim commentators, which had recently been translated into Latin. Following in the tradition of Muslim and Jewish thinkers, Aquinas developed an analysis of the doctrine of creation ex nihilo that remains one of the enduring accomplishments of Western culture. His analysis provides refreshing clarity for our often confused contemporary discussion of the relationship between science and religion.

It seemed to many of Aquinas' contemporaries that there was a fundamental incompatibility between the claim of ancient physics that something cannot come from nothing and the affirmation of Christian faith that God produced everything from nothing. Furthermore, for the Greeks, since something must come from something, there must always be something — the universe must be eternal.

Recent speculations that the universe began as "quantum tunneling from nothing" reaffirm the ancient Greek principle that you cannot get something from nothing. For the "vacuum" of modern particle physics, whose "fluctuation" some see as bringing our universe into existence, is not absolutely nothing. It is not anything like our present universe, but it still is something. Or else, how could it fluctuate?

An eternal universe seemed incompatible with a universe created ex nihilo, and so some medieval Christians thought that Greek science, especially in the person of Aristotle, ought to be banned, since it contradicted the truths of revelation. Aquinas, believing that the truths of science and the truths of faith could not contradict one another — God being the author of all truth — went to work to reconcile Aristotelian science and Christian revelation.

The key to Aquinas' analysis is the distinction he draws between creation and change. The natural sciences, whether Aristotelian or those of our own day, have as their subject the world of changing things: from sub-atomic particles to acorns to galaxies. Whenever there is a change there must be something that changes. The Greeks are right: from nothing, nothing comes; that is, if the verb "to come" means a change. All change requires an underlying material reality.

Creation, on the other hand, is the radical causing of the whole existence of whatever exists. To cause completely something to exist is not to produce a change in something, is not to work on or with some already existing material. If, in producing something new, an agent were to use something already existing, the agent would not by itself be the complete cause of the new thing. But such a complete causing is precisely what creation is. To create is to give existence, and all things are totally dependent upon God for the very fact that they are. God does not take nothing and make something out of "it." Rather, anything left entirely to itself, separated from the cause of its existence, would be absolutely nothing. Creation is not some distant event; it is the continuing, complete causing of the existence of everything that is. Creation, thus, is a subject for metaphysics and theology, not for the natural sciences.

Aquinas saw no contradiction in the notion of an eternal created universe. For, even if the universe had no temporal beginning, it still would depend upon God for its very being. There is no conflict between the doctrine of creation and any physical theory. Theories in the natural sciences account for change. Whether the changes described are biological or cosmological, unending or finite, they remain processes. Creation accounts for the existence of things, not for changes in things.

Aquinas did not think that the opening of Genesis presented any difficulties for the natural sciences, for the Bible is not a textbook in the sciences. What is essential to Christian faith, according to Aquinas, is the "fact of creation," not the manner or mode of the formation of the world. Aquinas' firm adherence to the truth of Scripture without falling into the trap of literalistic readings of the text offers valuable correction for exegesis of the Bible which concludes that one must choose between the literal interpretation of the Bible and modern science. For Aquinas, the literal meaning of the Bible is what God, its author, intends the words to mean. The literal sense of the text includes metaphors, similes, and other figures of speech useful to accommodate the truth of the Bible to the understanding of its readers. For example, when one reads in the Bible that God stretches out His hand, one ought not think that God has a hand. The literal meaning of such passages concerns God's power, not His anatomy. Nor ought one think that the six days at the beginning of Genesis literally refer to God's acting in time, for God's creative act is instantaneous.

Adhering to the traditional reading of Genesis and the doctrinal proclamation of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), Aquinas believed that the universe had a temporal beginning. Aristotle, he thought, was wrong to think otherwise. But Aquinas argued that, on the basis of reason alone, one could not know whether the universe is eternal. Furthermore, if there were an eternal universe it still would be a created universe. To affirm, on the basis of faith, that the universe has a temporal beginning involves no contradiction with what the natural sciences can proclaim, since on their own they leave this question unresolved. Hawking's denial of an absolute beginning to time, while also affirming a finite past, involves complicated speculation about quantum gravity, which itself remains not fully worked out. Regardless of the intelligibility of Hawking's scientific claims, the conclusions about creation he and others draw from them are false.

The Big Bang described by modern cosmologists is a change, not a creation; the natural sciences do not themselves provide an account for the ultimate origin of all things. Apologists for the Christian doctrine of creation ought not to think that the initial "singularity" of traditional Big Bang cosmology offers scientific confirmation of their view. Nor ought those who reject the doctrine of creation think that recent variations in Big Bang cosmology support their view. Even if the universe were the result of the fluctuation of a primal vacuum, it would not be a self-creating universe. The need to explain the existence of things does not disappear. Contrary to the claim that the universe described by contemporary cosmology leaves nothing for a creator to do, were a creator not causing all that is, there would be nothing done.

Aquinas would have no difficulty accepting Big Bang cosmology, even with its recent variations, while also affirming the doctrine of creation out of nothing. He would, of course, distinguish between advances in cosmology and the philosophical and theological reflections on these advances.

The variations in Big Bang cosmology I have mentioned are only theoretical speculations, and there are likely to be more of them. Their status as mere "speculations," however, does not justify their failure to distinguish among the domains of the natural sciences, metaphysics, and theology, nor their encroachment on nonscientific ground. Like the little boy mentioned at the outset, we are being told a great deal that is beside the point of our question. Thomas Aquinas did not have the advantage of the Hubble Space Telescope, but in many ways he was able to see farther and more clearly than those who do.


William E. Carroll "Aquinas and the Big Bang." First Things 97 (November 1999):18-20.

This article is reprinted with permission from First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life published by the Institute on Religion and Public Life, 156 Fifth Avenue, Suite 400, New York, NY 10010. To subscribe to First Things call 1-800-783-4903.


William E. Carroll is Professor of History at Cornell College in Mt. Vernon, Iowa.

TOPICS: Catholic; History; Religion & Science; Theology
KEYWORDS: 1tim47; catholic; creation; genesis; stephenhawking
Interesting article for all you theorists out there.
1 posted on 01/27/2010 10:32:29 PM PST by Salvation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All
Aquinas and the Big Bang
Life Lessons from the Patron Saint of Scholars [St. Thomas Aquinas]
The Cross Exemplifies Every Virtue [St. Thomas Aquinas]
Vatican Official Considers Aquinas' Comeback (Recalls Morality Was Scorned in the 60s)

St. Thomas Aquinas on Just War
The Holy Trinity (excerpt from the Light of Faith by St. Thomas Aquinas)
[Today is] The Feast of St. Thomas Aquinas
Creation, Evolution, and Thomas Aquinas

St Thomas Aquinas on "Whether the female sex is an impediment to receiving Orders?"
Mel Gibson and Thomas Aquinas: How the Passion Works
Saint Thomas Aquinas Confessor, Doctor of the Church,1226-1274
January 28 - Feast Day of St. Thomas Aquinas - Pope John Paul II on the Angelic Doctor
A Defense of the Ecumenical Gathering at Assisi (Ecumenism in St. Thomas Aquinas)

Saint Thomas Aquinas
Aquinas as Relevant as Ever, Says Cardinal Grocholewski(Guide for Harmony Between Faith and Reason)
Aquinas on The Principles of the Philosophy of Nature
Whether it is always sinful to wage war? (Aquinas on Just War)
A Hymn By St. Thomas Aquinas - Pange, Lingua, Gloriosi (Acclaim, My Tongue, This Mystery)

2 posted on 01/27/2010 10:39:46 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

YEC and local Luddite complete dismissal of Aquinas (and, by extension, science) in 3... 2... 1...

3 posted on 01/27/2010 10:44:56 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Thomism at ~2am!!!

I possess the insight to appreciate that I have a FR problem.

4 posted on 01/27/2010 10:51:23 PM PST by seton89 (Use Amendment X as your email signature)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
The Catechism of Thomas Aquinas series
5 posted on 01/27/2010 10:53:58 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Thomas Aquinas wrestled with the implications for Christian theology of the most advanced science of their day — namely, the works of Aristotle and his Muslim commentators, which had recently been translated into Latin.

It would be truer to say that Thomas Aquinas rescued the works of Aristotle from his Muslim commentators.

Averroes - Aristotle's primary muslim commentator - advocated the principle of twofold truth, maintaining that religion has one sphere and philosophy (science) another.

The concept that there can be more than one truth is another way of saying there is no truth. This concept was congenial to Islam with its arbitrary and inconsistent deity. And we see the fruits of this philosophy down to the present day: not just in the crazy, murderous inconsistency of Islam, but in the crazy, murderous inconsistency of the Left.

But the concept of divided Truth won't do for reality - for the real God and the real world. This is one of Aquinas' great gifts to posterity: the idea that the Truth Is What It Is.

For instance: no future scientific discovery can actually disprove God, so we can embrace science (objective, old-school science, not 'modern' science) without fear.

6 posted on 01/28/2010 12:24:45 AM PST by agere_contra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Thank you. This was very interesting.

7 posted on 01/28/2010 11:02:14 AM PST by Crolis ("Nemo me impune lacessit!" - "No one provokes me with impunity!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Saint Thomas Aquinas, Priest & Doctor of the Church

Saint Thomas Aquinas,
Priest & Doctor of the Church
January 28th

Benozzo Gozzoli
Triumph of St Thomas Aquinas
1471 -- Tempera on panel
Musée du Louvre, Paris

Adoremus Hymnal

St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) was educated at the Abbey of Monte Cassino and at the University of Naples. In 1244 he joined the Dominican Order. Considered one of the greatest philosophers and theologians of all time, St. Thoms gained the title of "Angelic Doctor". He had an undisputed mastery of scholastic theology and a profound holiness oflife. Pope Leo XIII declared him Patron of Catholic Schools. His monumental work, the Summa Theologica, wasstill unfinished when he died.

Source: Daily Roman Missal, Edited by Rev. James Socías, Midwest Theological Forum, Chicago, Illinois ©2003


God our Father,
You made Thomas Aquinas known
for his holiness and learning.
Help us to grow in wisdom by his teaching,
and in holiness by imitating his faith.
Grant this through our Lord Jesus Christ, Your Son,
who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever. +Amen.

First Reading: Wisdom 7:7-10,15-16
Therefore I prayed, and understanding was given me;
I called upon God, and the spirit of wisdom came to me.
I preferred her to scepters and thrones,
and I accounted wealth as nothing in comparison with her.
Neither did I liken to her any priceless gem,
because all gold is but a little sand in her sight,
and silver will be accounted as clay before her.
I loved her more than health and beauty,
and I chose to have her rather than light,
because her radiance never ceases.

May God grant that I speak with judgment
and have thought worthy of what I have received,
for He is the guide even of wisdom and the corrector of the wise.
For both we and our words are in His hand,
as are all understanding and skill in crafts.

Gospel Reading: Matthew 23:8-12
But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called masters, for you have one master, the Christ. He who is greatest among you shall be your servant; whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.


Sweetest Jesus,
Body and Blood most Holy,
be the delight and pleasure of my soul,
my strenght and salvation in all temptations,
my joy and peace in every trial,
my light and guide in every word and deed,
and my final protection in death. Amen

St. Thomas Aquinas
The Aquinas Prayer Book, Sophia Institute Press,

Prayer of Saint Thomas Aquinas:
"Ad Sacrosanctum Sacramentum"

O sacred banquet at which
Christ is consumed,
The memory of His Passion recalled,
our soul filled with grace,
and our pledge of future glory received:

How delightful, Lord, is Your spirit,
which shows Your sweetness to men,
offers the precious bread of heaven,
fills the hungry with good things,
and sends away empty the scornful rich.

V. You have given them bread from heaven.
R. A bread having all sweetness within it.

Let us pray:

God, Who left for us a memorial of Your Passion in this miraculous sacrament, Grant we implore You, that we may venerate the holy mystery of Your Body and Blood, so that we may ever experience in ourselves the fruitfulness of Your redemption.
You who life and reign, world without end. Amen.

(Translation from The Aquinas Prayer Book, Sophia Institute Press)

Link to The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas -

8 posted on 01/28/2010 4:16:13 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson