I notice from James McGrath that some US churches are celebrating an “Evolution Sunday” either yesterday or next week.
I’m afraid my Anglican soul revolts at these special Sundays for this, that and the other, however worthy the cause or idea. Sundays are a celebration of the Lord’s resurrection, which also take a particular character as we travel through the liturgical year. They are not meant to be themed teaching opportunities on the preacher’s favourite causes.
But more, as celebrations of the Lord’s resurrection, Sundays keep the first day of the new creation, after the Lord has finished the work his Father gave him (see esp. John 4:34 and 19:30) and rested for the sabbath in his tomb – at least that’s the driving liturgical impulse derived from St John’s narrative. The whole point of the gospel, it seems to me, is that we need God’s in-breaking new life – we won’t evolve into perfection according to the Myth of Progress. Put another way, God promises us in the resurrection that the second law of thermodynamics won’t have the last word.
All of that makes “Evolution Sunday” a very strange idea, I think. The Universal Unitarian resources (PDF) James points to make it seem even stranger –and I hardly think it will help commend the idea of evolution to those conservative Christians who most need to discover that evolution is the best and truest theory we have if he points out that heretics are all for it.
As a matter of fact, I did mention evolution in the course of yesterday’s sermon on the (second) Genesis story as set in the lectionary, and I would expect to mention it whenever its relevant. But to have an “evolution Sunday” – ugh!
{ 5 comments }
evolution is the best and truest theory we have
You need to read more on this issue. A good start might be Stephen Meyer’s “Signature in the Cell”. His discussion of the reasoning processes required in the historical sciences to avoid committing the fallacy of affirming the consequent might help you to see things more clearly.
Thanks, but it’s you who need to read more. I’d suggest starting with Francis Collins. ID is not science, since it lacks the ability to generate investigable hypotheses.
As coincidence would have, I just finished reading:
The End of Intelligent Design?
Feb 9, 2010
Stephen M. Barr
It is time to take stock: What has the intelligent design movement achieved? As science, nothing. The goal of science is to increase our understanding of the natural world, and there is not a single phenomenon that we understand better today or are likely to understand better in the future through the efforts of ID theorists. If we are to look for ID achievements, then, it must be in the realm of natural theology. And there, I think, the movement must be judged not only a failure, but a debacle …
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2010/02/the-end-of-intelligent-design
The ID window or beauty does not need to achieve anything. It may not be hard science, but it does look at the signs of intelligence. And the beauty and mystery of Creation are never complete without the simple sense of just gazing on the design, and hopefully the designer. I am myself an old earth creationist, hopefully with no axe to grind, so whether theist-evolution, or creatio ex nihilo…Creation! Amen Doug/Clayboy!
‘Special Sundays’ have a some history. We’re pretty much stuck with Remembrance Sunday, Mothering Sunday and Harvest Festival, though they’re clearly not an integral part of the calendar, but additions. Then we have lectionary hints on Sexagesima Sunday and Easter 4 that we should be thinking about creation and ministry respectively. Actually, I think keeping the Sunday around St Luke’s Day as Healthcare Sunday can be quite an important focus for a congregation as a day to explore the church’s healing ministry. And to top it all, all of these intentions gain greater meaning when celebrated as part of the weekly commemoration of Christ’s resurrection on a Sunday.
Of course, it would ridiculous for a church to observe every fund-raising day that a group flags up. On balance, I think a sermon on evolution outlining how creationism is based on a superficial reading of the Bible and ID is ideological pseudo-science, and that both are, in the Greek meaning of the word, idiotic. So, I’m kind of sad I missed Evolution Sunday.
Comments on this entry are closed.