Rod Dreher spent two months this summer getting wined and dined by the Templeton Foundation, and is celebrating by featuring in his Dallas Morning News RELIGION Blog (shouting in the original) a sampling of a wide variety of RELIGIOUS luminaries making the case for “why science should talk to religion.”
It is quite a long post, representing a dizzyingly broad array of viewpoints, so as a public service I will give you the gist of each person’s response:
KATIE SHERROD, Episcopal lay activist, Diocese of Fort Worth:
The government once infected Black men with syphilis. See how wicked science is without religion!
ROBIN LOVIN, SMU professor of ethics:
Scientific dogma and religious dogma actually have lots in common! For example, they’re both dogma.
MATTHEW WILSON, SMU political scientist (Roman Catholic):
As Albert Einstein said, “Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.”
GEORGE MASON, senior pastor, Wilshire Baptist Church:
Scientific explanations change as more data becomes available, so science should “keep a sense of openness” that religion might provide “plausible structures” of knowledge.
DEAL HUDSON, The Morley Foundation (Roman Catholic):
“Metaphysical reasoning” is superior to “empirical science,” and science actually has nothing to say on questions like “was Jesus the product of parthenogenesis?” and “did Jesus come back to life after being dead for 3 days?” and “why was Jesus so popular with the ladies?”
NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, priest, ISKCON:
“Metaphysical reasoning” is necessary to do “empirical science,” and can help science answer questions like “is Krishna the source of all the avatars?” and “what was the precise nature of Krishna’s relationship with Radha?” and “why does the end of My Sweet Lord sound so familiar?”
AMY MARTIN, executive director, Earth Rhythms:
blah blah blah some hippie shit blah blah blah.
BOB DEAN, Dallas Baptist Association:
The most important truths come from the Bible, but there’s some less important truths that come from science.
JOE CLIFFORD, pastor, First Presbyterian Church (Dallas):
e.e. cummings wrote a poem about how religion is a perfectly legitimate way to appreciate a sunrise
DANIEL KANTER, pastor, First Unitarian Church of Dallas:
[does not make any sense]
CYNTHIA RIGBY, professor, Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary:
The Apostle Paul would have wanted us to.
RIC DEXTER, Men’s Division Chapter Leader, Nichiren Buddhist (Soka Gakkai organization)
As Albert Einstein said “Science without religion is lame and religion without science is blind.”
LARRY BETHUNE, pastor, University Baptist Church (Austin):
As Albert Einstein said, “Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.”
WILLIAM B. LAWRENCE, dean, SMU Perkins School of Theology:
Science needs to recognize the “merits” of religious truths.
DARRELL BOCK, professor, Dallas Theological Seminary:
Religion has a soul, while science has a brain.
–
I know this heady discussion has caused me to see the accomodationism debate in a new light, and I’m glad that Dreher didn’t muck up the discussion by talking to any, you know, scientists.
I’m thinking it’s time to go talk to religion. Who wants to be my wingman?
If you’re seriously asking for a wingman- I might go.
I live south of Seattle…
If you promise to distract all the fat and ugly clergy, then we’ve got a deal.
Why are the two quotes about Einstein exactly the same?
My suspicion is that they all Googled for authoritative quotes to back up their positions, and that was the first one that came back.
A man died on an hospital bed, but the doctors kept working on him and all of sudden he opened his eyes. The doctors were stunned. They said to the patient, Do you know that you were actually dead fo a few minutes. The patient said: Yes. The doctors asked what it was like, and he said he saw god! The doctors were stunned, and said what was he like? The man said, First of all, she was BLACK, destroying two miscomceptions.