In these remarks I do undertake one more time the attempt to answer the following question: what do agnostics really want? This issue is so complicated that even the agnostics themselves had great trouble in delivering the answer. This is also related to these agnostics, such as the recalled here Charles Darwin, Albert Einstein, and Stephen W. Hawking, who belong to the greatest format of scholars. The agnostics are being distanced from, both the atheists and theists. However they do judge differently their views it is important that as well the first as the latter ones may appreciate what stands behind agnosticism and this might be very variable.

Contrary to a widespread thesis about the non-cognitive character of religious beliefs, I argue that it is beneficial to highlight and not marginalize the place of religion in the epistemic sphere. At least some religious beliefs (especially theism) can be qualified as true or false. Holding them as true is usually based on the evidence which is not widely accepted. This, however, does not entail that these beliefs are not true. If they are true, then holding them to be true should be seen as rational, despite of the fact, that the supporting evidence does not seem to be strong in the light of current epistemic standards of justification. It does not mean, however, that such beliefs can be hold with the highest assertion if they evoke serious doubts. Changes in religious doctrines and religious pluralism do not constitute a sufficient reason for excluding religion from the epistemic sphere, as a similar situation concerns many academic disciplines, such as philosophy, or psychology.

University and the Church need each other. Following the example of Christ incarnated, Christianity “incarnates” the spiritual. The Church and theology need university and cooperation with other sciences to be able to “incarnate” Christ’s issue into our world. Th e university, on the other hand, needs the Church and theology because otherwise it would be deprived of cultural and spiritual foundation: there is no alternative to a discussion about Christ (God and a human). Theology is sometimes defined as scientia fidei; it is determined by the mind and faith. It’s a discussion about God, but due to the Christ event it is also a discussion about mankind. Th erefore it has the form of a dialogue, a discussion. The dialogue is always held in a specific context (nowadays postmodern), in which theology not only has to ask but also answer the question about the meaning. In this sense it is wisdom. Theology as a discussion has to approach the most urgent human problems. These include agnosticism towards which Benedict XVI suggests the “veluti si Deus daretur” rule, relativism in case of which theology cannot stop asking about truth, despair in case of which theology reminds about God, in whom there is no darkness.