While Pastor at North Church we observed Evolution Weekend in many ways, including showing films on a Friday or Saturday evening followed by a discussion, and including prayers for scientists in the liturgy. I did not preach a sermon focusing on evolution or even mentioning evolution every year, but in 2009 I did.
“The Race for Survival”
A Sermon based on 2 Kings 5:1-14 and 1 Corinthians 9:24-27
2009
seems to be filling up with observances of significant birthdays of significant
historical figures. Presbyterians and
Reformed Christians around the world will celebrate John Calvin’s 500th
Birthday this coming July 10. This past
week we marked the 200th birthday of Abraham Lincoln and Charles
Darwin, both born on February 12, 1809.
With
the election of Illinois Senator Barack Obama as the 44th President
of the United States and his frequent references to that other Illinois Senator
elected President, there has been renewed interest in Lincoln and his
presidency. The popularity of Doris
Kearns Godwin’s 2005 book Team of Rivals:
The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, has added to that renewed interest
in the 16th President.
While
Americans are renewing their interest in Lincoln, Brit’s are renewing their
interest in Charles Darwin. Buried in
Westminster Abby with full state honors, Darwin is one of England’s more famous
sons. In addition to this year being the
200th year since Darwin’s birth, it is also the 150th anniversary of
the publication of his seminal work On the Origin of Species.
At
first it might seem that the day of birth is the only thing Lincoln and Darwin
have in common. But consider this
stretched, perhaps even forced, but original metaphorical comparison: As Lincoln freed slaves from involuntary
servitude; Darwin freed moderns from their bondage to pre-modern religious
dogmas.
Now
segue to the reading from 2 Kings 5 and the
story about the healing of Naaman. When Naaman presented himself to the King of
Israel with a letter from the King of Aram requesting that the King of Israel
cure Naaman of his leprosy, the King of Israel thought that the King of Aram
was “trying to pick a quarrel” with him.
In some circles, especially religious circles, even mentioning the name
of Charles Darwin, or his theory of Evolution, would be akin to picking a
quarrel. I, however, have no bone to
pick with Darwin. Nor do I desire to
pick a quarrel with you or anyone else.
On the other hand, not mentioning him in a sermon during the year in
which we mark his 200th birthday and the 150th
anniversary of the publication of On the Origin of Species might be considered
irresponsible. Perhaps as Elisha healed
Naaman of his leprosy, I might help heal us of some of our fear of talking
about both faith and science in the same hour and in the same room, especially
an hour of Christian worship in a Christian sanctuary.
Personally, I have never had a problem
reconciling my faith with the theory of evolution. I have always been a scientifically minded,
and not since early adolescence have I taken the entire Bible literally. In high school I was on a college preparatory
scientific track that included five years of math and both Chemistry and
Physics in my junior year. I was named
one of three outstanding Chemistry I students.
In my spare time I hung out in the Planetarium and once spent all night
in the cold winter air with the person who taught both physics and astronomy to view Comet Kohoutek.
All my vocational testing in high school indicated
that I should have entered the scientific field as a chemist, physicist, or
mathematician. But I wanted to me a
minister.
Between high school and college I
spent a week in Wilmington, Delaware with a lot of other scientifically minded
teenagers. On three of those days I
worked with physicists at the DuPont Research Facility. In college I continued to study math even
though I was majoring in Social Work, and had accumulated enough hours in Math
and Psychology to qualify for and be inducted into Chi Beta Phi, a National Scientific
Honorary. My older brother holds a
Bachelors degree in Electrical Engineering and a Master’s degree in Chemistry.
Science is in my blood. It is in my DNA. I can no more ignore Darwin
than I can ignore Calvin. Thus it should
not surprise you that a few years ago I signed an open letter from American
Christian clergy concerning Religion and Science, part of the Clergy letter
Project. “The Clergy Letter Project is an
organization that has created and maintains a statement signed by American
Christian clergy of different denominations rejecting
creationism, with specific reference to points raised by intelligent design
proponents. This effort was organized in 2004 by biologist Michael Zimmerman,
now Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at Butler University in
Indianapolis, Indiana.”
The
text of the letter states “Within the community of Christian believers there
are areas of dispute and disagreement, including the proper way to interpret
Holy Scripture. While virtually all Christians take the Bible seriously and
hold it to be authoritative in matters of faith and practice, the overwhelming
majority do not read the Bible literally, as they would a science textbook.
Many of the beloved stories found in the Bible – the Creation, Adam and Eve,
Noah and the ark – convey timeless truths about God, human beings, and the
proper relationship between Creator and creation expressed in the only form
capable of transmitting these truths from generation to generation. Religious
truth is of a different order from scientific truth. Its purpose is not to
convey scientific information but to transform hearts."
"We the undersigned, Christian clergy
from many different traditions, believe that the timeless truths of the Bible
and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist. We believe that
the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood
up to rigorous scrutiny and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement
rests. To reject this truth or to treat it as “one theory among others” is to
deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our
children. We believe that among God’s good gifts are human minds capable of
critical thought and that the failure to fully employ this gift is a rejection
of the will of our Creator. To argue that God’s loving plan of salvation for
humanity precludes the full employment of the God-given faculty of reason is to
attempt to limit God, an act of hubris. We urge school board members to
preserve the integrity of the science curriculum by affirming the teaching of
the theory of evolution as a core component of human knowledge. We ask that
science remain science and that religion remain religion, two very different,
but complementary, forms of truth.” End
of letter.
The Clergy Letter Project has
designated the weekend closest to Darwin’s birthday as Evolution Weekend, an
opportunity for serious discussion and reflection on the relationship between
religion and science. One important goal of the weekend is to elevate the
quality of the discussion on this critical topic - to move beyond sound bites.
A second critical goal is to demonstrate that religious people from many faiths
and locations understand that evolution is sound science and poses no problems
for their faith. Finally, as with The Clergy Letter itself, which has now been
signed by more than 11,000 members of the Christian clergy in the United
States, Evolution Weekend makes it clear that those claiming that people must
choose between religion and science are creating a false dichotomy.
Through sermons, discussion groups,
meaningful conversations and seminars, religious leaders and religious
communities, by participating in Evolution Weekend, attempt to show that
religion and science are not adversaries. Perhaps before this time next year, the
session will officially choose to endorse and participate in Evolution weekend
and North Church can offer itself as a religious community where people of
faith do not have to choose between science and religion.
A
few years ago my interest in science led me to read The Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey by Spencer Wells. Doctor Wells heads up the Human Genographic
Project, not to be confused with the Human Genome Project, though there are
some similarities. Doctor Wells and the
Human Genographic Project used DNA to trace human migration. Their research suggests that all humans are
indeed descendants of the same woman and man, but not as we might usually
think.
According
to findings of the Human Genographic Project: “Mitochondrial Eve – the mother
of us all—lived in Africa around 150,000 years ago. She represents the root of the mitochondrial
family tree, and as such she unites everyone around the world in a shared
maternal history. Adam, the man from
whom all men alive today ultimately derive their Y-chromosomes, lived 59,000
years ago; more than 80,000 years after that estimated for Eve.
These
dates obviously do not represent the date of origin of our species—otherwise
Eve would have been waiting a long time for Adam to show up. They simply represent the time, peering back
into the past, when we stop seeing genetic diversity in our mitochondrial DNA
and Y-chromosome lineages.
We
are a relatively young species. Around
60,000 years ago—only 2,000 generations—our ancestors all lived in Africa. Another way of saying this is that all modern
humans were in Africa until at least 60,000 years ago.”
Thus,
while it does seem scientifically true that we can indeed trace the origin of
our species back to one woman and one man, they did not live in a garden
between the Tigris and Euphrates less than 5,000 years ago, as Bishop Usher
once suggested. They lived in the Rift
Valley of Africa over 60,000 to 150,000 years ago.
Now segue to the reading from 1
Corinthians 9, where Paul writes to Christians in Corinth that “in a race the
runners all compete, but only one receives the prize.” Is that not the essence of Darwin’s theory of
evolution, the survival of the fittest, and that all species are running in a
race and that only those that adapt survive?
If I understand Darwin’s theory correctly, it is a species’ ability to
genetically and biologically adapt over time that enables a species to survive
and that accounts for evolutionary change.
While it is not fair to apply Darwin’s
theory of biological change to social systems, Social Darwinism has done just
that. Rather than appeal to misapplied
evolutionary theory, however, I appeal to the philosophy of Hegel and his
theory of dialectic; of thesis, antithesis and synthesis, to argue that the
institutional Church must also change and adapt if it is to survive as an
institution. The reason Judaism,
Christianity and Islam and other “living” religions have survived is because
they have been able to adapt.
When religions do not adapt to changing times and circumstances, they die
out. They lose the race.
Hegel argued that which is true will
survive. Another way of stating it is
that which survives is true. If our
faith changes and adapts to answer new questions and face new situations that
could not even have been imagined two thousand years ago, then our faith is
true and will survive. If our faith is
too concrete, too static, too fundamentalist, and too rigid, unable to change
and adapt, then it probably will not survive and after its demise will be
judged not to be true.
While
I think that Darwin’s theory of evolution is the best scientific explanation
for the various species now inhabiting planet earth and for why some species
have become extinct, I do not believe in evolution. I do not place my faith in Darwin. I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and place
my faith in God, the Holy One of Israel.
While I think the theory of evolution is the best explanation of how
life evolved on earth, it offers absolutely no explanation of why it
evolved. For that I must turn to Scripture.
I
think Darwin offers us the best explanation of how different species have so
far won the race for survival. I think
the Bible offers us the best message for finding meaning in light of the fact
that so far humans seem to have won that race.
No comments:
Post a Comment