Faith and Healing: A Forum

So I think we have to be cautious about what we do with the information that we have right now. I think we have a long way to go in terms of really learning what the nature of those kinds of experiences actually is. That's why even though I think the research shows that there are a lot of different changes that go on in the brain when people engage in religious and spiritual practices, that doesn't mean that there was somebody who came in and did the hardwiring.

Dr. Sloan, how do you react to the idea of a divine interventionist?

Sloan: Well, that conception is antithetical to science. Science doesn't deal in supernatural explanations, and that's a supernatural explanation. Religion and science address different concerns, and it's perfectly plausible, I think, as Dr. Newberg has suggested, to be a scientist and still believe in divine presence. But that doesn't mean that your belief in the divine presence finds its way into your science. Those are different things. Religion deals with a different domain.

Handzo: Yes, I would say that's right. I think part of the reason this whole debate has raised some hackles in the religious community is the perception that we're trying to prove the existence of God. And, of course, religious people, and I think rightfully so, say, No, no, no, that's a matter of faith. You are now crossed over, and you are trying to take science into the realm of religion and use scientific method and methodology to say that my faith is right or wrong. That's just not going to work, and I'm going to push back on that as a religious person.

I started out as an undergraduate as a scientist and only went to religion later, and there are those people who said to me that I couldn't be ordained because I had been a scientist, and that polluted my thinking.

Science and religion have different ways of thinking about reality that are both helpful, and both need to be accounted for. And I think in terms of health, the issue is how do we account for--in the health-care system and in the practice of health--the process of faith? And how does that integrate into how medicine gets practiced or how chaplaincy gets practiced or psychology gets practiced?

Sloan: I frankly think there is nothing that science can do that can contribute to religion, and I think it's a fatal flaw to think that you can use the methods of science to learn something meaningful about religion.

But can't the tools of science be used to teach us about the subjective experience of religion--as Dr. Newberg is describing, with brain scans and the like--and teach us something about how we process it?

Sloan: Let me ask you a different question. Would it be meaningful if we did a brain scan of someone before and after eating cheese? I don't understand the value of developing beautiful images, very appealing, aesthetic images of brain scans and people engaged in various religious experiences. I don't see the value any more than imaging people while eating cheese.

We explore what the brain looks like in depressed people, in people struggling with memory issues ...

See pictures of spiritual healing around the world.

See pictures of Pope Benedict XVI visiting America.