Even farther off topic... In the last century, some theologians opposed the use of anesthetics for childbirth, for exactly that reason.

But, then, there were some who opposed Ben Franklin's lightning rod for theological reasons: it negated the Lord's lightning...

Instead of casting this as a battle between science and religion, I think this might better be taken as a battle between dogma and empiricism. Empiricism (which is highly valuable to science) is merely the practice of trying things out. Alchemy, while only modestly scientific, was highly empirical. Technology, per se, is somewhat scientific, but solidly empirical.

This actually leads to a debate as to whether "computer science" is really a science, or merely an empirical exploration of functionality, a la alchemy. There are some valid philosophical points to be made on both sides.

Astronomy is a science. Lens-grinding is empirical. Both lead to an increase in humanity's overall knowledge, and thus (as most of us would agree) both are good.

Silas