Evolving the Sacred

19 June 2009

Lucifer FallsAs a homeschooling family, every year we’re confronted with the  task of buying curricula for various subjects; math, reading, grammar, and… science. As a homeschooling family involved in the local coop, there are, um, certain expectations revolving around the science curriculum. If you do it with the coop group, for example, it is a pretty standard, “creationist” science orientation. (And yes, I’m fully aware of the problem placing “creationist” and “science” right next to each other in the same sentence.) If you DON’T have your kid do their science with the coop, it’s assumed that you’re doing  creationism at home. At the very least, something Intelligent Design-ish.  But to actually teach evolution? If you’re going to do that, you might as well forget homeschooling altogether and just stick your kid into your local secular, democrat, hegemonic public school.

The Gorge Trail runs at the base of the glen.

The Gorge Trail runs at the base of the glen.

An anecdote: a few weekends back I spent a spectacular day at Robert Treman State Park in New York, which houses two glacial glens and some breathtaking gorges and waterfalls. You cannot but be stunned by the power of water and time and what it can do to rock.  I commented something to this effect; my 8 year old gets my drift and asks “how old is all this daddy?” Before being able to answer, the wife cuts in “oh, sometime between Adam and Noah, honey.” Well, yeah, that puts it in a context that the kid can understand and is still sufficiently vague enough to allow for a LOT of time. Fine, but when I pointed out that the glens were formed over a number of ice ages over two million years, well before “Adam,” I got the cynical “well, who knows if the earth is even that old anyway.”

Sigh.

Look, having been brought up fundamental Christian and who yet still is somehow wired to find elements of the sacred in the natural world, I have had a long struggle with evolution. But I can say this; I’m more unimpressed by religious responses to Darwin and evolution than I am by  evolution itself. Let me be clear: I take Darwin’s understanding to be a reasonably close approximation of how life has developed, and natural geological physics to be an equally fair approximation of the formation of planet earth as we now live in and experience it. In my own religious and academic development, I have gone from the combative creationist to the reluctant Intelligent Designist to a rather apathetic “science is science, and Bible is Bible, and ne’er shall the twain meet” approach. Now, not only do I find all three of these standard Christian “reactions” wide of the mark, but in reality irresponsible theologically as well as scientifically.

Part of the reason I’ve turned my back on these three so-called Christian/religious opposing positions is that I’ve come to realize that these, in fact, all give assent to the materialist skepticism promoted by the leading lights of neo-Darwinian evolutionary thought (namely Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and Stephen Jay Gould) who have argued that religion, theology, and evolutionary science are fundamentally irreconcilable with each other. On this, Creationism, Intelligent Design, and “separatists” agree with their hostile critics, thus ceding the defining terms of the debate to their opponents. I no longer believe this starting point is even true, and as a result, I have to pull the rug out from under pseudo-scientific Creationism, Intelligent Design, and the separatist wall between church and scientia.

What this means is that I’m not signing off on a classically Christian fundamentalist oppostion curriculum for my school to teach (as homeschooling principal and Chair of the School Board) and I’m not signing off on my kids getting pseudo-science from the local coop (as the concerned, diligent parent). For the purposes of basic elementary education of my two kids, though, separatism is probably the best approach; teach Bible, teach science, and teach them both right and on their own disciplinary terms. In the meantime, during expeditions such as we love going on, I need to work on an evolutionary theology to make room for science in the concept of the sacred, and make room for the sacred in natural, scientific, evolutionary history. As a result, I’ve started a most fascinating powder-keg of a book by John F. Haught entitled God After Darwin. Highly, HIGHLY recommended. I’ll report back with some results as I make some headway.

Entry Filed under: Education, Fundamentalism, Homeschooling, Religion, Science. .

5 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Jim  |  19 June 2009 at 8:18 pm

    “Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.”, a quote from Einstein, and yes I know Einstein related more as time went on with his Jewish cultural heritage than his Jewish religious heritage, but I think this still applies. He was religious in the sense that there must be something larger to put meaning to all the facts/postulates/theories/calculations/etc we call science.

    And here we are as adults wrestling with the religion/science thing, so I think your approach with kids is on target. Teaching them what you understand to be the truth on each will allow them to think about such things in a more intellectually honest way as they grow older.

    It’s interesting you bring this up at this time as well. I subscribe to the James Taylor newsletter and he speaks to this some as well… speaking about his father being a scientist, and having no strong religious connection, but having a spiritual need. He also speaks about the awe natural formations can inspire in a person and to make them think that much more…

    Let’s not forget that Darwin himself was Christian…

    Reply
  • 2. Benedict  |  19 June 2009 at 9:20 pm

    “Truth?” Them’s fightin’ words…

    More seriously, I think your observation about thinking about things more “honestly” as they grow older is spot on. And that falls on us as teachers, whether its at the elementary level or high school or doctorate. When we avoid giving students what they need to make their own decisions (even if we disagree with those decisions when they DO get made) we fail as teachers. And even as parents. One of the advantages I have as a homeschooling parent is that I CAN do Bible and Evolution if I want. In the public system, you can’t get Bible, and all you get is Evolution. In the Christian school sector, you can get Bible, but you can’t get honest science. But the flexibility to develop a critical AND RESPECTFUL attitude is present in homeschooling, at least in theory.

    Reply
  • 3. Ken  |  19 June 2009 at 10:21 pm

    Yes, I agree that evolution should be taught as it is, and that the theological approaches to dealing with it have all failed. I think your approach is best.

    My own background, as you know, is in liberal theology. I think the mistake there has been to say that evolution poses no theological problem. It does, of course, not in a liberal’s reading of Genesis, but in a liberal’s reading of the cosmos – is there indifference or kindness in the order of the cosmos?

    Lately I have been thinking about the metaphors Darwin used in Origin of the Species. I think the metaphors, if taken literally, cause many unnecessary theological problems. Rather than chance and necessity, I think it is fair to use the metahors error and travail. Error is a more contemporary metaphor for what happens in the genetic process, in the mostly predictable copy process that sometimes goes wrong and creates something new. Travail seems a more fitting metaphor for the struggle for life rather than survival of the fittest because the latter is too often misinterpreted as just the red tooth and claw stuff. I think error (things turning out differently than expected) and travail do not fight with theology.

    In addition, I think that within liberal theology there is room to look at things the way Mircea Eliade did (even in our age of suspicion.) I think he offers a way of understanding why it is so hard for us in modernity to look at the world in a religious way, and yet a way to understand our humanity by connecting, in a sense, with the way our ancestors looked the world.

    I have found that looking closely at what Darwin wrote and what we later learned about genetics and playing with the unavoidable metaphors, coupled with Eliade’s insights largely resolve the conflict for me. I think it is possible to affirm that the origin of species has involved error and travail over a long period of time is not ultimately incompatible with a theological view that there is an ultimate kindness to the order of the cosmos.

    Reply
  • 4. Christina  |  24 June 2009 at 11:57 am

    Hey it’s the Christina from Le Moyne’s religion class. I’m actually a blogger myself I just didn’t say so in class, I don’t know why. But I enjoy reading blogs and writing some and I have countless blogs. But I was reading yours and this one began with your children being home-schooled and what to do about teaching science.

    I noticed the jab at public school & I know where you are coming from. But I’ve gone to parochial (in the churchly sense of that word) school my entire life and surprisingly I was taught a pretty standard balance between creationism and evolution. I was taught both and I use both today, I go back and forth with opinions on each one when the discussion comes up in a particular group of people. It is always better to know more sides of the story to think upon then to only know one side, and that is my problem with public school teaching.

    I don’t know much about how public school teaches “the evolution story” but I’m pretty sure they don’t include the teachings of Genesis. But regardless of which schooling you choose, you, yourself, can always introduce and teach your children “both sides” of the creation story. Later on when they are older they will too be able to use both and choose which parts of each to believe.

    Reply
  • 5. Benedict  |  24 June 2009 at 9:19 pm

    Ha! Yeah, you didn’t mention that you like to blog. I love doing it, and reading other people’s too, but time is usually a problem. As you can probably guess. :-)

    Yeah, the “jab” at public schooling is actually more of a sarcastic, rhetorical jab at evangelical homeschooling in general. I appreciate the observation about how you received, in parochial school (by which I am assuming you mean “catholic”, since Protestant Christian schooling goes with “christian school,” unfortunately…) a mix of both evolutionary origns and biblicist, creationist origins. This is what I think needs to happen for kids today who are brought up in the Christian, Biblical tradition. (For those NOT so brought up, I don’t have much of an issue with Darwinian or neo-Darwinian evolutionary biological origins.) One thing I wonder, though, is where do we make the transition? At what point do we begin the process of “fusion” between Darwin and Bible, to make the effort to reconcile the apple to the orange, so to speak?

    Maybe a bigger problem is trying to convince the primary “science teacher” of the importance of evolutionary thought in the development of the theological thinking of young people, and children too. I’m certainly open to suggestions here, especially from people like yourself, who have experienced a good balance in your education.

    Looking forward to seeing your presentation tomorrow!

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Required

Required, hidden

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Quote of the moment

My essays come from a desire to understand what I love and what I hope for and to defend those things. -- Wendell Berry

Dates of Discourse

June 2009
S M T W T F S
« Apr   Jul »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

Recent Comments

hypocritical4u on Brought Up Born Again
Jim on Do YOU think you have Sam…
Do YOU think you hav… on Trick or tre…ah, skip…
Wendy on Church Escape
Ken on Church Escape
crystal on Church Escape
Benedict on Evolving the Sacred
Christina on Evolving the Sacred
Ken on Evolving the Sacred
Ken on Disappearing Act

Top Posts

Topics of Discourse

Absurdity Always we begin again Apocalypticism Beauty Bible Books Christianity Church Community Consumerism Crisis management Democracy Economy Education Election Empire Environment Eschatology Ethics Evangelicalism Faith Family Food Fundamentalism Fun stuff Holidays Homeschooling Inspiration Interfaith Islam Judaism Lectio Lent Liberalism Life Media Memory Ministry Mumblings... Mysticism Nature Poetry Politics Pop culture Power President Reading Religion Revelation Rumination Science Scriptures Sermons Sexuality Spirituality Stewardship Theology Wendell Berry Worldview Worship

Blogroll

Who’s Reading?

Vanity counter

Email me