No. I am merely suggesting that religious ideas are not amenable to the scientific methodology, and thus that science cannot either “accept” or reject religious ideas.
Similarly, aesthetic ideas are not amenable to the scientific methodology, so science cannot either “accept” or reject them That does not mean that “science is completely incompatible with” aesthetics.
I would suggest that there is a middle ground between “deny[ing]” and “accept[ing]” something. There is the position of not having an opinion or, further, that an opinion cannot be formed within the methodology under consideration.
(Parenthetically, this does not however mean that science cannot settle empirical claims, even when those empirical claims may be the result of religious ideas.)
So I repeat my question, with an (I would think) obvious clarification:
can anybody present a widely-accepted definition of science that “CAN peacefully accept [NOT merely fail-to-deny] the existence of a limited number of religious ideas”?