I would like to respond to Mgr Joseph Farrugia’s article ‘Affirmation of God’ (June 3) where he claims that the affirmation of God’s existence is not a scientific question; that it goes beyond that.

Firstly, it is always nice to hear an authority from the faithful say that God’s existence is not an empirically testable hypothesis. Up to not that long ago, a statement like that would easily put a person’s life in danger.

It is not very clear what Farrugia means by his statement ‘‘beyond scientific assessments’’. He seems to imply that revealed truth has a greater value than evidenced truth. This presents a degraded version of reality and a very naïve view of what it means to have an authentic understanding of reality.

Truth is in fact a very special property that we assign. Truths should be hard won. One of the best examples of this is the germ theory of disease which took many years to understand and is still a matter of scientific investigation. Up to the time when the discovery was made well known, there were many superstitions being popularised, some of which actually harmed a great number of people.

Scientists, in this case biologists, not only learned how to understand the problem but also how to start tackling it, such as with new sanitation rules. In any other part of our lives we always postpone acceptance of an idea until we have evidence to support it, and reject ideas that go against what we see.

In the case of the empirical world, scientists go through a laborious process when studying how a problem works. This involves properly understanding the problem and coming up with possible hypotheses to try and explain what is going on. Beyond that, these ideas must firstly be ‘falsifiable’, which is another way of saying that they can be tested.

Secondly, others must be able to repeat the results. This is the revolutionary shift that science brings to the table. Instead of casually needing a small confirmation of some idea or proposition, science requires rigorous evaluation of every part of a theory before accepting it.

Farrugia continuously reverts to scientists who happen to be religious. This is misleading way of arguing one’s case. Truth should not depend on the status of the person trying to convince you. Contrary to what he states, theology is not a science for this very reason. It is completely divorced from the process of testing hypotheses.

Throughout the centuries the various faiths have reincarnated themselves in light of new scientific discoveries, each time retreating in their scope

This puts theology in a strange position where it is not at all clear what value to assign the work that theologians do. Science, on the other hand, is open for everyone, who is interested, to engage with and to take part in. Science is the only successful way that we have ever learned anything about the real world and how it works.

Religion requires the suspension of our reasoning faculties and necessitates the surrender of our natural scepticism that has made humans so successful as a species. We should not look at faith as being beyond science but a rejection of it. Throughout the centuries the various faiths have reincarnated themselves time and time again in light of new scientific discoveries, each time retreating in their scope.

Science is more than the sum of its parts. It is open to everyone and offers a way in which ideas can be challenged in a constructive way. It is so much more than what Farrugia pictures as ‘‘stamp collecting’’. Whether through the photos the Hubble Space Telescope takes or the images electron microscopes produce, science can offer so much more wonder and inspiration of the astonishing universe we live in.

Farrugia tries to paint a world where scientists should be embarrassed when discussing philosophy, but he has no hesitation in devaluing scientific truth in comparison to values in his faith. I believe this to be a faux pas. Church authorities have spent thousands of years making extraordinary claims over the world that would make any self-respecting scientist blush.

It is Farrugia who should be embarrassed. His Church rejects a host of scientifically well-known facts, among which are that being gay is not natural.  It has actually been part of humanity for a long time and well known to be very present in the animal kingdom. Their opposition to the use of condoms is also a point of contention since it is the best known way of slowing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.

There is also a problem with the tone a theologian like him uses when discussing science. One gets the impression that science and faith are on an equal footing.

The scientific process has not only given the world some solutions to its problems but also a way to solve some of them.  Science may not be able to solve every problem out there but we should not take its successes lightly.

Jackson Levi Said is a researcher in cosmology and lecturer at the Institute of Space Science and Astronomy at the University of Malta.