Needed: Religious Leaders who Play Along with Science

Last updated on: May 1, 2020 at 2:10 pm by Kyle Roberts

Needed: Religious Leaders who Play Along with Science 2020-05-01T14:10:25-05:00 Kyle Roberts

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

This pandemic has exposed a lot of things, one of which is a division in society between those who take science seriously, and those who don’t.

Trump’s recent suggestion that Americans might be saved from the Coronavirus with an injection of disinfectant was both ludicrous and dangerous, but it yet again exposed the breach–this time with bleach.

Popular evangelical Christianity, so crucial to Trump’s election, is not known for a deep respect for science. Young earth creationism, the brain child of fundamentalist religion, often pretends to be scientific, but in principle affirms “biblical authority” over scientific explanations – when push comes to shove, science must bend the knee to the god of biblical literalism.

Ian Barbour’s influential model of how science and religion often relate to each other is useful to a degree (every typology has its limits of use). Conflict, Independence, Dialogue, and Integration. The populist Christian fundamentalist attitude often looks a lot like the “Conflict” approach. Religion vs. Science, Creation vs. Evolution, Jesus vs. Darwin–that sort of thing. See Barbour’s classic Religion and Science: Historical and Contemporary Issues, for a thorough explanation of the model.

In 1979, Jean Francois-Lyotard noted that western society was entering the Postmodern Condition, a state in which discrete communities of knowledge would hardly be able to talk to each other. Facts would be “facts,” not facts, because interpretations of reality and data would differ so drastically. Truth would be relative*,* tradition-dependent, and so on.

A tendency of a postmodern-shaped mind is to be thoroughly distrusting of any claim to objectivity or to absolute truth – to reject the “totalizing narrative,” or the “metanarrative,” such that science itself can be so thoroughly questioned, that astronomy has hardly more value than astrology. Everything is perspective!

I’m exaggerating for effect, but this shift to emphasizing perspectives and to critiquing the power-dyamics of the knowledge-industry has had some profound consequences. We are reticent to speak of “truth” or “facts” or objectivity, for fear of being called old-school modernists.

It’s been said many times before, but the election of Trump has underscored the extent to which a populist postmodernism (which, to be fair, is a perverse version of academic postmodernism) has overtaken us–to society’s detriment.

In his 1998 book, Duet or Dual: Theology and Science in a Postmodern World, Wentzel van Huysteen argued that in the postmodern context, the relation between science and religion functions best when approach as a duet rather than as a duel. Rather than give in to the postmodern temptation to reduce everything to perspective, or to be lazy about truth-seeking and fact-finding, we could adopt a critical-realistic framework, striving toward objectivity, truth, meaning, and values with the distinctive resources of science and theology in tandem–as a duet.

As he puts it,

Only a theology that takes contemporary science completely seriously will have the ability to develop this kind of complementary view (cf. Watts 1998) between theology and science. It is here that the elusive duet between science and religion finally becomes a reality in the interdisciplinary space created by a postfoundationalist evolutionary epistemology. In this duet theology does not succumb to an allegedly superior natural scientific rationality, and it also does not retreat to the esoteric safe haven of a unique religious rationality. In this exciting duet with science, theology retains its intellectual integrity as a discipline precisely by maintaining its uniquely religious viewpoint in interreligious discussion (160-161).

In this time, when so much has been and is being exposed, we need religious leaders, theologians, pastors, who take science seriously and who lead others in doing the same. We need religious leaders who can play together with science, as in a duet.

CCO via Pxfuel.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

April 10, 2020

The Waiting is the Hardest Part: Holy Saturday and COVID-19:

Next Post

May 10, 2020 Mother God: What Are We Doing When We Call God "She"?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month December 2020 November 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 December 2018 July 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz