LETTERS

Evolution debate

Cartoon: Bill McArthur

Many thanks for this extensive correspondence. Guy Douglas asks whether “evolution is a threat to Christian faith”.

I should like to completely change the starting point by considering the human person who is the root of scientifi c and religious discovery. It is the living, breathing, loving person who makes the discovery in science and to do this he/she has to have a strong faith, whether in science, or any other creative venture.

The basis of faith is the deep love of the subject, whether it is of a living organism or part of the so called non-living universe. When one experiences this love, the universe becomes personal, and we meet Jesus, who epitomises this love. Here, Jesus is a person for all mankind, whatever religion or none. He is personal love.

So Guy Douglas need not worry that a scientifi c theory, however fl awed, can be a threat to faith because it is through love, the unconditional love of Jesus, whichever religion is invoked or none at all, that the answer to the mechanism of evolution will be found.

This debate is fascinating and there are original voices that have not been mentioned in your columns, those of Sheldrake (The Science Delusion Hodder and Stoughton 2012) and of Teilhard de Chardin (The Phenomenon of Man Collins 1965), which show that there are other ways of considering the impact of evolution on human thought and destiny.

John Kusel, Cumbernauld

I fi nd the current letters in Life and Work about the Evolution Debate very interesting. May I add my ‘tuppence worth’? The fi rst question is whether one accepts that the earth has a long history (dating back some 4,500 million years), during which, at some stage, life began in simple forms which developed over time into the billions of forms that we see today, including human beings. If one does accept such a past, how we account for it? As I understand it, the terms Darwinism (theory of Natural Selection) and evolution are not suffi ciently precise for contemporary debate. Denis Lamoureux in his book Evolutionary Creation uses the terms ‘Teleological Evolution’ and ‘Dysteleological Evolution’. He says ‘the former means a planned and purposeful natural process that leads to the creation of life’. The second means ‘a worldview without any ultimate plan or signifi cance’.

Darwin, I understand, did not dismiss the possibility of God, though Aldous Huxley among his followers did. So Huxley, and perhaps ‘the majority of leading evolutionary scientists today’ (to quote Guy Douglas’s phrase) would be on the Dysteleological side, whereas Francis Collins, and other Christians, would be on the Teleological side – both sides believing in evolution.

The current debate in Life and Work seems to be on whether Dysteleological arguments are suffi cient to explain the development of ‘novel biology’, and whether we as Christians should agree or disagree with these arguments? Further scientifi c research will answer those problems, (and possibly raise others).

I suggest that teleological advocates should be interested in scientifi c evidence, which informs the debates, but need not commit themselves to any particular argument on the philosophical side.

A teleological faith is teleological because of other criteria.

For myself, I think evolution is right because I fi nd it the most helpful explanation of how the earth has come to where it is, but it is a teleological evolution that I accept.

Hugh Trevor (North Berwick)

Remembrance view

Are we a bit confused in the UK on the issue of Remembrance? No one will deny that we should, in a dignifi ed way, remember those who have given their lives in the service of their country.

But we do seem to be a bit challenged on just how we should do it.

Surely it would be best if one day (November 11 ) was made a bank holiday on which all who wish could participate in appropriate ceremonies. These, I submit, despite my own cloth, need not necessarily be religious.

The present arrangements, very C of E and tradition based, do not really fi t with our multicultural society. There has to be a strong case for the setting up of Citizens’ Assemblies to discuss how best in the four nations of the UK we best ‘remember’.

Andrew McLuskey (Rev), Ashford, Middlesex

Buildings matter

I wish to support Grant Lawrence from Brechin in his letter about buildings (Life and Work December). Of course they matter! We know and have often stressed that the church is not the building, the church is the people.

But the people need somewhere to meet.

In this terrible year it has been great that modern technology has made it possible to share worship online and that possibly some have heard the Gospel who would not otherwise have done so. However, we must never see this as a substitute for meeting in a building together. And it is the togetherness that matters, seeing one another even if we are socially distant and may not sing. For those of us who live alone this has been a diffi cult time and to get back into the church building and share with others again is wonderful.

We are not solitary creatures. In the beginning God made a man in his own image, then a woman to be a companion to him.

Jesus did not choose one follower to do his work , he chose twelve.

So as we go forward we must try hard to keep as many buildings as is fi nancially possible so that we can be the community of believers. We have many beautiful ancient churches that remind us of those who have gone before. Modern buildings are important too, maybe in a new-build area where we must have a presence.

Online worship will never be a substitute for gathering with one another in the place set apart.

Mary Morrison (Rev), Edinburgh

Life and Work welcomes letters from readers of not more than 350 words which can be sent by email to magazine@lifeandwork.org during the Coronavirus Covid-19 epidemic.

For verification purposes letters must be accompanied by the writer’s name, address and daytime telephone number. Anonymous letters will not be published. In exceptional circumstances the Editor will consider publishing a letter withholding the details of the writer, provided verification can be made. The Editor reserves the right to edit letters for space and legal reasons.

This article appears in the February 2021 Issue of Life and Work

Click here to view the article in the magazine.

To view other articles in this issue Click here.

If you would like to view other issues of Life and Work, you can see the full archive here.