***This is being published by me for Frank***
I recently took the time to read the draft of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America’s (ELCA) social statement on Genetics, Faith, and Responsibility. The statement has many points for all to ponder – as individuals, as a church, and as a society. However, the statement below brought a smile.
“The ELCA contends that morally responsible discernment about these matters requires knowledge and insights from both religious and secular sources. This statement draws on both to provide a framework for theological reflection, public moral deliberation, congregational life, pastoral practice, and mission-oriented action. It focuses attention on analysis, values, and convictions and not on specific issues. Such specific issues require detailed attention and may change quickly as genetic science and its applications open new frontiers and pose new questions.”
In short, the ELCA statement (and others in the document) says that for us to face the decision as a church, society, and individuals, each of us need knowledge of theology, genetics, and the application of in our lives.
With that as the setting, I shift to another topic involving science and theology, thus ask this question: Is knowledge about evolution, science, theology, and the interchange between science and theology required to be able to make an informed decision about evolution?
I’ve written about this topic in the past, and continue to do so on Wednesdays. I invite readers here to visit [A Frank Angle] to share your thoughts on past and upcoming pasts. See [Religion and Science] in the Categories sidebar for past posts.
4 comments:
Be assured that there shouldn't be any conflict between science and religion. For science is about "discovering" what our Heavenly Father has done and is doing--regardless of whether it is ever recognized as being as such or not.
Fishhawk,
Interestingly, I have to agree and disagree with your point. Your beginning is powerful, thus an appreciation of creation. On the ending though, works on a misconception that many have. There are many scientists who recognize it! ... and let us remember that the atheistic scientists don't speak for all scientists.
Its an interesting angle, but personally I think the ECLA has bigger issues to take care of, for instance, where in Scripture do they get the idea that "infant sprinkling" does anything, and where exactly is the imperative that the priest should offer absolution to the congregation? Isn't that something ultimately between the sinner and Christ alone?
Just some general theological beefs I have with Lutheranism.
Lavender,
Critique of the Lutheran church is not the purpose of this post. Although I do not want to us this post to create a critique & defense of the ELCA, I will address your concerns in a respectful way.
Lutherans see infant baptism as God receiving us as members of his kingdom, thus eternal life. Martin Luther advised Christians to remember there baptism each day, which also involves confessing our sins. Yet, sins are ultimately between the individual and God.
Post a Comment