Neurotheology

How Science Can Enlighten Us About Spirituality

There are observable links between brain activity and spiritual practice. Indeed studies suggest that people who regularly meditate have larger brains than those who do not. But does this show that religion lies within and is a product of the brain and, that like weightlifters building muscle, brain-builders can add bulk to their grey matter through such practices as meditation?

Or, to take the related questions further, is consciousness solely a result of brain activity, or is the brain merely the conduit for a far wider awareness? Put another way, are we creatures of mind, body and spirit – or simply mind and body?

These questions are at the heart of an emerging science, ‘Neurotheology’, and in his synonymous book Andrew Newberg reviews the limited research that has been conducted to date and projects ahead to what might be possible.

Much has been discovered about the workings of the human brain, but such is the mystery and complexity of the organ that, in all probability, only a fraction of what there is to know is currently known.

Much, it is believed, is known about God, from scripture, revelation and religious practice, but such is the enormity of the idea of God that this knowledge too is just the smallest fraction of the unfathomable whole.

In bringing together the modern study of the brain and nervous system, neurology, and the ancient discipline of theology to create neurotheology – Andrew Newberg hopes that our understanding of both God and the brain will be expanded.

Newberg’s own background is rooted in science. He is a medical doctor and heads a research institute linked to an American university hospital. The research he cites in his book includes experiments involving brain-scans of people involved in religious practice and the administration of drugs. What he lacks in his background is theological training and a real understanding of deep spirituality. The book’s weakness is that neurotheology, being such a young discipline, as yet has no answers to offer to some intriguing and monumental questions. The book’s strength is that it is admirably sane, with no hint of the wackiness that can so often accompany works claiming to ‘know’ what is at the root of spiritual experience.

The problems of interpreting experimental findings is illustrated by the story of the nun and atheist. A nun agreed to undergo a brain-scan while at prayer. On seeing the results, she said how meaningful it was to her to see the changes in her brain that occurred. It supported her belief in the importance of prayer. A while later an atheist reviewed the same results and concluded with satisfaction that they demonstrated how religion was nothing more than brain activity.

Dr Newberg is well aware of the problems involved in combining two subjects with very different methodologies. As a science, neurology relies on observation and controlled experimentation. Theology interprets subjective experience within the framework of a belief system. Neurotheology, Newberg argues, must be open to all possibilities and should it be shown beyond doubt that religion and spirituality are nothing more than the manifestation of brain activity, then that conclusion must be accepted. Similarly if the opposite is found, the neurotheologian must be openminded. An admirably fortean sentiment.