This online course examines the relation between the disciplines and worldviews of modern science and Christian theology with the aim of providing a scientifically informed, theological understanding and appreciation of nature as God’s work of creation.

1. GOALS: The course has two overarching goals that are meant to be achieved simultaneously, one intellectual and academic, the other aesthetic and religious.

• The intellectual goal is to develop a sophisticated way of relating the worldview of modern science with the Christian theological view of creation. This is a matter of understanding science and theology as distinct disciplines that engage the same world of nature in different manners, and then finding the way these two disciplines can be positively related to one another in an integrated and mutually respectful way, with the assistance of philosophy to settle the fundamental questions that underlie both science and theology.
• The religious goal is to develop and deepen one’s aesthetic awareness and admiration for the order and beauty of creation. Although too often the advance of science has been used to dismiss religious faith in God, in reality, once one can see that supposedly “scientific” objections to God rest upon untenable philosophical foundations, the scientific understanding of the complex and intricate details of nature can foster a deeper appreciation of the Creator’s wisdom and goodness.

2. APPROACH:

1. In order to achieve both a positive way of relating science and theology and a deeper aesthetic appreciation of creation’s order, beauty and goodness, the course will proceed in three phases or modes, each consisting of four week sessions.

• The first mode investigates the foundations, methodologies, and ways of relating these two disciplines, including the crucial role philosophy (natural, epistemological and metaphysical) has in mediating their relation. It also includes beginning the process of deepening one’s appreciation of the beauty and order of the workings of nature as the glorious work of the Creator.
• The second mode is historical, tracing the development of modern science out of the Christian synthesis of reason and faith (Athens & Jerusalem) in order to dispel common myths about their supposed conflict and opposition, as well as to work through the gradual shifts in cosmology from one framed in terms of a literal reading of the Bible to one built upon the discoveries of science.
• Working through this development toward today’s secular worldview prepares for the third and final mode of the course, the treatment of how the findings of modern science can lend support for Christian theology, such as how evolution and the Christian doctrine of creation can be reconciled or how God can be conceived as working through nature. By discussing these contemporary issues upon the principles and historical understanding learned in course, the student should be well prepared for the pastoral work of showing how a robust and properly theological vision of creation can incorporate the greater understanding of nature’s ways and wonders achieved by contemporary science.

2. Discussion methodology

All students read all required readings. Each week, each student will be assigned one of the readings for analysis and asked to post by Thursday in the following format. One sentence only is necessary for each category below:

PURPOSE: What in your view is the author’s burning question in this chapter or article?

POINT: How does the author attempt to answer the question?

PRESUPPOSITIONS: What does the author presuppose about you, the reader?

PRAXIS VALUE: What difference might the author’s point make in our individual or communal lives?

After the student writes these four sentences, he or she may expand on his or her responses in the discussion with the group. Auditors are welcome to enter the discussion. Professors will enter the discussion as they are able between Thursday and the following Monday. (See the end of the syllabus for evaluation of online discussion.)

3. ENVISIONED LEARNING OUTCOMES

1. Students will demonstrate the following from philosophy:
2. an understanding of the legitimate autonomy, method and limitations of the scientific understanding of nature;
3. an understanding of the role philosophy (philosophy of nature, epistemology, and metaphysics) has in mediating the relation between theology and science;
4. critical thinking skills to evaluate religious and scientific worldviews and the misuses of religious beliefs and scientific understandings (e.g., fundamentalism and reductionism);
5. Students will demonstrate the following from theology:
6. an awareness of the historical developments in the relation between science and religion, including the role the Christian worldview and the Church (officially and by its members) had in the emergence and development of science; and
7. an understanding of the proper and false ways of correlating science and theology;
8. an understanding of a theological cosmology (theology of nature) that agrees with but is not reducible to the scientific understanding of nature as evolving in its physical structure and life forms;
9. an understanding of the importance and meaning of the Christian doctrine of creation along with a deeper aesthetic appreciation of nature as a manifestation of God’s glory;
10. an understanding of God’s active relation with the world that is properly theological (based on revelation and tradition) and supportive of natural causality studied by science;
11. an understanding of the contemporary theology of creation for the purpose of answering objections to the Christian faith based on the misuse of scientific understandings.

4. COURSE SCHEDULE

Week 1: INTRODUCTION TO COURSE; PERSONAL INTRODUCTIONS: Input by Professors: What are the Terms for Comparison: “Religion and Science” or “Theology and Science”?

Readings:

• Lindberg & Numbers, God and Nature, Introduction (Person 1 posts the four sentences)
• John Paul II, “Address at the Vatican Observatory, June 1, 1988” (Person 2 posts the four sentences)
• Denis Edwards, How God Acts (Person 3 Forward, and Person 4 Preface, post the four sentences)

Activities:

• Familiarize yourself with the way the course looks on the Learning Management System, called Populi.
• Post a Picture and Personal Description in your Personal Discussion Forum
• What are your initial impressions coming into the course about the relationship between theology & science?
• Begin keeping a journal in the personal forum on the reflections questions below.

Reflection questions for personal forum: Often we wonder, “What is becoming of Christian Life in this secular, postmodern age?” What is your own answer to this and related questions? What do you think is the contemporary relationship between religion and science? What do you think it should be? State your initial impression regarding both areas of conflict and areas of compatibility between theology and science.

Week 2: THE RELATION BETWEEN SCIENCE AND THEOLOGY

Input by Professors: Commonalities and Differences between the Disciplines of Science and Theology; Various Models for Relating Science and Theology

Readings:

• Ernst Mayr, “What is Science?” (Person 1)
• Ernst Mayr, “How Does Science Explain the Natural World?” (Person 2)
• Avery Dulles, “Science and Theology” (Person 3)
• Ian Barbour, When Science Meets Religion, Preface and Introduction (Person 4 analyze either one)

Activities:

• Find Examples from the Web that Typify the Different Models of the Science-Theology Relation

Reflection questions for personal forum: Ian Barbour distinguishes 4 ways of characterizing the relationship between science and religion: conflict, independence, dialog, integration. Each of his chapters covers a specific topic from these 4 viewpoints. Do you find this structure to be a useful way of looking at the issues?

Week 3: THE PROBLEM OF SCIENTIFIC MATERIALISM

Input by Professors: Whether Modern Science Conflicts with Christian Faith

Readings:

• Barbour, When Science Meets Religion, chapter 1. (Person 1)
• Barbour, When Science Meets Religion, chapter 2 (Person 2)
• Stephen M. Barr, Modern Physics and Ancient Faith, Chapters 1 – 2 (Person 3), Chapter 3 (Person 4)

Activities: Enter in your personal discussion forum a response to at least one of the questions below.

Reflection questions for personal forum:

• Scientific Materialism is a philosophy that seems to say that if something isn’t covered by science, it doesn’t exist; nothing other than matter exists, etc. How is this philosophy different from science? Why is scientific materialism a frequent viewpoint among scientists?
• Stephen Barr points out the presence of dogmas in the belief system of scientific materialism. In what ways are such dogmas similar or parallel to the dogmas of religion, and in what ways do they differ?
• What is the difference between Natural Theology and Theology of Nature?
• What does contingency mean? As applied to creation? As applied to present-day life?

Week 4: THE MEDIATION OF PHILOSOPHY

Input by Professors: The Need for Natural Philosophy, Epistemology, Metaphysics, Greek Philosophy, and Christian Faith

Readings:

• Lindberg & Numbers, God and Nature, Chapter 1 (Person 1)
• Lindberg & Numbers, God and Nature, Chapter 2 (Person 2)
• Michael A. Hoonhout, “Thomas Aquinas and the Need for a Contemporary Theological Cosmology” (Person 3 and 4)
• Recommended: 2002 report of the “International Theological Commission“

Activities: Enter in your personal discussion forum a response to at least one of the questions below.

Reflection questions for personal forum:

• The response of the Church fathers to Greek philosophy in general, and to the acquiring of natural knowledge of nature in particular, varied widely, ranging from quite positive to quite hostile. Explain the range of responses, and give the reasons offered for each kind of response. Is only one of these responses (negative or positive) the proper approach to natural knowledge, or is their biblical support for both views regarding nature (‘the world”) and to philosophical endeavors (the ‘wisdom of the world’). Justify your position with theological evidence.
• Which position of the patristic fathers do you most identify with, and why? Which do you find least attractive or tenable, and why?
• Two important developments in the Middle Ages were the reintroduction of Aristotelian philosophy (including his physics and metaphysics), and the condemnation in 1277 by the bishop of Paris of errors drawn from Aristotle’s natural philosophy. How did the introduction of Aristotelian philosophy change the Church’s understanding of nature and the explication of Christian theology? [Another way of asking the same question is: what are the differences between a neo-Platonic philosophy of nature and a theology using neo-Platonic terms and an Aristotelian philosophy of nature and a theology using Aristotelian terms?] Since this appropriation led to a condemnation of 1277 of many false errors concerning creation, was it a mistake to adopt such a philosophical system? Why or why not?
• The excerpts from Mayr’s book This is Biology gave a contemporary account of how modern science studies and understands the natural world. In his account at times Mayr contrasted modern science with its precursors, natural philosophy and the religious attribution of natural events to the actions of the gods. In light of these two chapters from God and Nature, how would you reassess Mayr’s account? How would you explain the difference between natural philosophy and modern science differently? How does the ‘bigger picture’ of knowing the Christian critical appropriation of natural philosophy help one to better understand the relationship between the Christian religion (teaching and praxis) with modern science (its acquired learning and praxis)?
• What elements of the patristic and medieval approaches to natural knowledge of creation and to their use of it in supporting and defending Christian teaching and praxis are still viable today? In your engagement with your contemporaries concerning theology and science, what would you appropriate from them, and how would you update or modify what you appropriate? What would you insist needs to be discarded, and why?

Week 5: WONDER FOR THE BEAUTY OF CREATION

Input by Professors: Rational and Religious Appreciation of Natural Order; Beauty;

Readings:

• Edwards, Chapter 1, Characteristics of the Universe Revealed by the Sciences (Person 1)
• Edwards, Chapter 2, Divine Action in the Christ Event (Person 2)
• Barbour, When Science Meets Religion, chapter 3 (Person 3)
• Theodoret of Cyrus, On Divine Providence, Discourses 1-5 (Person 4, choose one discourse)

Activities: Post a reflection in your personal discussion forum on creation as the beautiful work of God by responding to at least one of the questions below.

Reflection questions for personal forum:

• Based on the readings from Edwards and Theodoret, what would you say are the natures and features of beauty (the beautiful)? What are the objective criteria for discerning beauty in the natural world from: a) a scientific viewpoint, and b) a theological viewpoint? What, if any, are the differences between them? Are there features or things in creation that only one discipline might find beautiful? [Note that the focus of this question is not upon divine glory, about which science could have nothing to say, but upon the beauty found in nature, which both science and theology have something to say, albeit from different perspectives.]
• The capacity to wonder is crucial to both the scientific and theological endeavors. Yet ‘familiarity breeds contempt.’ Does the investment of time and effort in the scientific or theological disciplines necessarily lead to a lessening in the child-like capacity to wonder, to still marvel at and appreciate the simplest of truths or discoveries? When this happens, how is one’s science or theology effected? How does one counteract this tendency, so that one can acquire the educated mind of the learned and yet retain the wondering eyes of the child?
• This week’s reading represents quite a shift in approach and perspective compared to the earlier readings regarding the philosophical and historical issues in the science-theology relation. How does this work fit in with what we have read previously? Has it added to your understanding of the science-theology relation in a new way, and if so, how exactly?
• It is sometimes said that the spirituality of each person gravitates and responds to one of the transcendentals (being, truth, goodness, beauty) more strongly than to the other three; we each see God primarily through the lens of one transcendental in particular. While contemporary authors are right to show the interconnectedness of the transcendentals, which of the four makes the strongest personal impact upon your spiritual life? How important is the transcendental of beauty in your spiritual life—how much does it impact your conception of and relation to the mystery of God? Or, how does greater reflection upon and aesthetic engagement with the transcendental of beauty affect your prayer life? Where does Christ Jesus fit in?

Week 6: 16TH – EARLY 17TH CENTURIES: THE BEGINNINGS OF MODERN SCIENCE

Input by Professors: Ockham, Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo; Cosmology Shift #1: From Terracentric to Heliocentric Cosmology

Readings:

• Blackwell: “Science vs. Religion: Conflict … Clash…”. (person 1)
• Lindberg & Numbers, God and Nature, Chapter 4 (Person 2)
• Lindberg & Numbers, God and Nature, Chapter 8, pp. 212-228 (Person 3)
• John Paul II, Pope. “Lessons of the Galileo Case.” Origins (Washington, D.C.: National Catholic News Service) vol.22, #22 (11/12/92): 370-75. (Person 4)

Activities: Begin (through the www.timetoast.com timeline engine) your group’s “Timeline on the history of the relation and interaction between science and Christian theology.”

Reflection questions for personal forum:

• What advances in science and technology were important factors in the time leading up to the controversy between the Ptolemaic system and the Heliocentric system?
• The Protestant Reformation and the Council of Trent occurred in the 16th century. How did those events alter the playing field during the time of Galileo?
• What big mistake was made by church authorities? What big mistake was made by Galileo?
• In what ways did the rise of science threaten the prevailing orthodoxy of Christianity?

Week 7: 17TH AND 18TH CENTURIES – ASTRONOMY AND THE MUSIC OF THE SPHERES

Input by Professors: Newton and Laplace; Cosmology Shift #2: From “Heavens and Earth” to “Universe”

Readings:

• Lindberg & Numbers, God and Nature, chapter 8, pages 228-35 (Person 2 and 4)
• Lindberg & Numbers, God and Nature, Chapters 9 (Person 1)
• Lindberg & Numbers, God and Nature, Chapter 10 (Person 3)

Activities: Enter into your personal discussion forum a response to at least one of the questions below.

Reflection questions for personal forum:

• Newton is arguably the greatest figure in early modern science, putting a definitive stamp upon the character of modern physics and the scientific worldview that would last until the 20th century. What is the overall view of nature—the basic constitution of matter and energy—that develops from this time, and how does it differ from the Aristotelian and medieval views? How is that difference in part attributable to physics becoming the exemplary science and mathematical measurement becoming a key investigative tool for understanding nature?
• What divine-like attributes are given to Nature in Newtonian physics? What are the reasons why Nature was understood this way? At the time, this ‘theological’ conception of Nature is readily attributed to God the Creator, yet how does it contain the latent potential to distance nature from God, so that it not only comes to be viewed as entirely secular, but as requiring that God not act in it in order for its integrity to be preserved? Does this scientific understanding of nature begin to change the meaning of the Christian faith, especially the understanding of God as the Creator, or does it rather reflect a change that had already occurred in Christian belief at the time? Is it significant that Newton had departed from orthodox (creedal) Christian faith and was more or less an Arian?
• Laplace represents an early example of science correcting earlier formulations, in this case how he was able to find natural causal explanations for the discrepancies noted by Newton between actual observations of the planets and the motion predicted by his theory. (Kepler correcting Copernicus on planetary orbits being elliptical and not circular is another example). The net result was that a natural phenomenon first attributed to a supernatural cause (God or the angels) came to be understood as fully explicable by natural causes. How does Laplace’s achievement further characterize the Newtonian view of nature? What assumptions about the nature and power of science emerge from the success of Laplace to find a natural explanation for an earlier conundrum? What lasting impact will it have upon the future relationship between science and theology?
• Previously, in Pope John Paul II’s Letter to the Vatican Observatory, we read that: “Only a dynamic relationship between theology and science can reveal those limits which support the integrity of either discipline, so that theology does not profess a pseudo-science and science does not become an unconscious theology.” Explain how Laplace’s success, in purging from the science of astronomy any reference to a “God hypothesis”, can be understood as an historical example of this point of JPII. That is, does Laplace’s achievement represent a scientific dismissal of a “pseudo-theology”, or rather, has it led science to an “unconscious theology”? Or are both true? Has this discrediting of the so-called “God-of-the-gaps” theory been, overall, more of a positive development in the relation between science and theology, or a negative one?

Week 8: 19TH CENTURY — FROM IMMEDIATE CREATION TO AN EVOLUTIONARY WORLD

Input by Professors: Geology and Darwin; Cosmology Shift #3: From the Biblical Narrative to Secular Time

Readings:

• Lindberg & Numbers, God and Nature, chapters 12 and 13 (geology) (Person 1)
• Barbour, When Science Meets Religion, Chapter 4 (Person 2 and 4)
• Lindberg & Numbers, God and Nature, Chapters 14-15 (Darwin) (Person 3)
• Optional lightweight reading: Flatland by Edwin A. Abbott.

Activities: Select the topic of your major project. Continue the timeline. Respond to at least one question below.

Reflection questions for personal forum:

• What does the theory of evolution as proposed by Darwin do for the science of biology? How does it not just advance the field, but revolutionize it? Upon what scientific advances in understanding our world is the theory dependent—i.e., what has to be learned about nature and the earth before the theory has the framework and support it needs to be conceived and accepted as tenable? How also does it depend upon advances in the practice of science itself—how does the theory’s conception, reception and promulgation indicate how the scientific effort in the 19th century had changed from the 17th and 18th centuries?
• In the period following the publication of The Origin of Species what are the various interpretations developed regarding the overall meaning and significance of the theory of evolution for the Christian religion? What exactly are the reasons—scientific, philosophical, religious—underlying each of these positions? Are there other motivations or concerns at work in the way the theory is accepted or rejected? In the end, which assessment of the significance of Darwin’s theory for Christianity and culture is in your view most tenable, and why?
• Does the theory of evolution truly undercut the design argument of William Paley? Why or why not? Does the theory of evolution fundamentally change the Christian understanding of God as the Creator of living things, or does it simply deprive Christian believers of a certain theological conception of the Creator? What exactly can no longer be said about the ways of the Creator after Darwin? Can you think of theological reasons, based upon the character of God revealed in the Scriptures and encountered in grace and Christian community—that would help a person to understand why God would create the diversity of life through the mechanisms of natural selection and adaptation to the environment?

Week 9: 20TH CENTURY – FROM ABSOLUTE TO CONDITIONAL

Input by Professors: Einstein and Hubble; Quantum Mechanics and Godel’s Theorem; Cosmology Shift #4: From a Static Universe to a Developing One

Readings:

• Haught, Making Sense of Evolution, Ch. 1 Read only
• Stephen M. Barr, Modern Physics and Ancient Faith, Part II (Chs. 4 – 8) (person 1)
• Barr, Modern Physics and Ancient Faith, Ch. 20, section 1: The Overthrow of Determinism (Person 2)
• Barr, Modern Physics and Ancient Faith, Ch. 22, section 2: What Godel Showed (Person 3)
• Barr, Modern Physics and Ancient Faith, Appendix C, “Godel’s Theorem” (Person 4)

Activities: Continue the timeline. Outline your individual project. Respond to at least one question below in your personal discussion forum.

Reflection questions for personal forum:

• At the end of the 19th century, certain notions about space, time and matter were generally accepted as true. What were those? How did they give an advantage to scientific materialism?
• What changed at the beginning of the 20th century that upset the prevailing beliefs about nature? What role did physics have in promoting a new look at philosophical positions that had prevailed since the enlightenment?
• Why was Einstein derided contemptuously by some prominent scientists? Explain how that led to a very major change in the 20th century world.
• Why was the philosophy of logical positivism accepted widely? How did the contribution of logician Godel change the perception?

Week 10: CHANCE VS. INTELLIGENT CREATOR

Input by Professors: How to Explain Order in the Universe?; Is there Purpose in the Universe and Does its Presence Point to an Intelligent Creator?

Readings:

• Haught, Making Sense of Evolution, Ch. 2 (Person 1)
• Barr, Modern Physics and Ancient Faith, Part III (chapters 9 – 11) (Person 2)
• Barr, Modern Physics and Ancient Faith, chapters 12 & 13 (person 3)
• Barbour, When Science Meets Religion, Chapter 5 (Person 4)

Activities: Continue to work in your personal forum on the theology of creation responding to at least one question below. Continue with group timeline project.

Reflection questions for personal forum:

• There are several different interpretations of the word “design.” Describe some of those, and point out the differences between them.
• Haught examines design in nature and says “theology . . . must allow that the Bible and other religious teachings cannot add anything to our store of scientific knowledge. However, scientists … must concede that evolutionary theory … cannot provide answers to religious or theological questions….” Explain how this is relevant to integrating Christianity and evolution. Comment on its relevance to contemporary Church teaching, e.g., Pope John Paul II’s letters.
• The controversies over the impact of the theory of evolution for Christian faith which began soon after the publication of The Origin of Species remain with us today. On the one hand, there are ideologically atheistic biologists like Richard Dawkins or Daniel Dennett who base their total rejection of God and religion to a great degree upon the success of Darwin’s theory to attribute to natural means what religion originally attributed to supernatural (i.e., divine) causes. On the other hand, there are those like Michael Denton, William Dembski and others who have recently proposed the theory of “intelligent design,” a contemporary form of Paley’s argument from nature’s evident design to the Creator, based upon weaknesses in contemporary biology to account for the emergence of “irreducible complexity.” Discuss one of the contemporary positions (either of these two or others) regarding the significance of the theory of evolution for Christian faith, drawing from extrinsic sources as needed (web materials, printed articles, etc.). Please summarize the argument, evaluate and critique it, and show how it compares to earlier controversies discussed in the assigned readings.
• Why is an “imperfect” design more likely to be God’s creation than a “perfect” design?

Week 11: PHYSICS AND THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE

Input by Professors: Is the Universe Ordered for the Emergence of Intelligent Creatures like Human Beings?

Readings:

• Barr, Modern Physics and Ancient Faith, Part IV (chapters 14-17) (Person 1)
• Barbour, When Science Meets Religion, Chapter 6 (Person 2)
• Edwards, Chapter 3 Creation as Divine Self-Bestowal (Person 3)
• Edwards, Chapter 4 Special Divine Acts (Person 4)

Activities: Move timeline to completion. Continue final project. Respond to at least one question below in your personal forum.

Reflection questions for personal forum:

• What is an “anthropic coincidence”? Give two examples.
• Distinguish between the “Weak Anthropic Principle” and the “Strong Anthropic Principle.”
• What is a “self-organizing” process?
• What is the role of information in advancing evolution?
• What is “the multiverse” hypothesis? Why is it preferred by some as an explanation? What serious defects in plausibility accompany it?
• What is meant by divine self-bestowal? Is God an interventionist?

Week 12: INTRODUCTION TO THE ACTIVITY OF GOD

Input by Professors: How to understand a non-interventionist God theologically and scientifically

Readings:

• Edwards, Chapter 5, Miracles and the Laws of Nature (Person 4)
• Edwards, Chapter 6, The Divine Act of Resurrection (Person 3)
• Edwards, Chapter 7, God’s Redeeming Act: Deifying Transformation (Person 2)
• Edwards, Chapter 8, God’s Redeeming Act: Evolution, Original Sin (Person 1)

Activities: Reflection questions for personal forum: (Choose one for your forum. These will also be key to the “point” of your summary discussions!)

• Explain how God can do remarkable things using secondary causes instead of disposing of them and intervening directly.
• Why and how is the resurrection a free act of God from within creation that gives creation its deepest meaning?
• Explain why deifying transformation of the human being does not mean becoming God.
• Explain the scapegoat mechanism and what it might mean in terms of evolution.

Week 13: HOW DOES GOD RELATE TO AND INTERACT WITH THE WORLD?

Input by Professors: Understanding Divine Causality in the Natural World; Process vs. Traditional Metaphysics; What does “big” mean?

Readings:

• Barr, Modern Physics and Ancient Faith, Chapters 18 – 20 (Person 1)
• Edwards, Chapter 9, Final Fulfillment: The Deifying Transformation (Person 2)
• Haught, Making Sense of Evolution, Chapter 3 (Person 3)
• Haught, Chapter 4 (Person 4)

Activities: Your individual major project should be very near completion by now; the final version is to be posted next week. Respond to at least one question below in your personal forum.

Reflection questions for personal forum:

• Why must the universe be “big” in both time and space?
• What about animals and the final deifying transformation? Are they included?
• Why did the notion of determinism, so dominant in the 19th century, go away?
• Haught draws attention to higher dimensions, such as information. How does the presence of information change reality into more than just arrangements of matter?

Week 14: THE DIRECTION OF EVOLUTION: EITHER/OR VS. BOTH/AND?

Input by Professors: How taking a higher, multi-level view renders obsolete some faith-science conflicts; perceiving unity in evolution as God draws man toward the future.

Readings:

• Haught, Making Sense of Evolution, Chapter. 5 – 6 (Person 1)
• Haught, Making Sense of Evolution, Chs. 7-8 (Person 2), Chapters 9-10 (Person 3)
• Edwards, Chapter 10 Prayers of Intercession (Person 4)
• Read only: Barr, Modern Physics and Ancient Faith, Chapters 21, 22, 23, 26; and Haught Chapter 11.

Activities: Student presentations due and posted in each student’s personal forum. Respond to at least one question below in your personal forum.

Reflection questions for personal forum:

• Is the computer a useful model for the way humans think? How do humans differ from lower life forms?
• With Haught’s “layered explanations,” what sort of unity does he bring to the treatment of God and evolution? Does intercessory prayer “work?” Why?
• What is the drama of evolution? How can we recognize that it has a direction?
• What does being “whole” mean? What is the role of Christ in establishing wholeness?

Week 15: STUDENT PRESENTATIONS

Activities: Live Student Presentation(s) via WebEx, week of December 1; date and time to be determined.

Reflection questions for personal forum:

• Haught explains that scientific materialism is incoherent it its attribution of morality and ethics to evolutionary adaptation. Explain why that position is in conflict with itself.
• Where did man’s religious inclination come from?
• How does the concept of resurrection fit into the framework of evolution?
• How is the viewpoint of Teilhard de Chardin both Christian and compatible with Darwinian science?
• What does it mean to say that “God is calling us forward from the future?”
• How can Darwin’s theory of evolution be considered a “gift” to Christian theology?
• Summarize the circularity of the materialists’ position. What cornerstone belief does it require? What is omitted in that belief system?
• What does trans-humanism mean? How is that associated with Christianity?

5. REQUIRED READINGS and RESOURCES:

• Stephen M. Barr, Modern Physics and Ancient Faith (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2003) ISBN-10: 0268021988 or ISBN-13: 978-0268021986. List price $ 20
• Ian G. Barbour, When Science Meets Religion: Enemies, Strangers, or Partners? (New York: HarperOne, 2000) ISBN-10: 006060381X or ISBN-13: 978-0060603816. List price $ 11.43
• Edwards, Denis, How God Acts: Creation, Redemption, and Special Divine Action. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2010) ISBN 978-0-8006-9700-6. List Price $24.81.
• John F. Haught, Making Sense of Evolution: Darwin, God, and the Drama of Life (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2010) ISBN-10: 066423285X or ISBN-13: 978-0664232856 List price $20
• David C. Lindberg and Ronald L. Numbers, eds., God and Nature: Historical Essays on the Encounter Between Christianity and Science (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1986) ISBN-10: 0520056922 or ISBN-13: 978-0520056923. List $30.54

The following excerpted texts will be available in the course template:

• Pope John Paul II, “Address at the Vatican Observatory, June 1, 1988,” in John Paul II on Science and Religion: Reflections on the New View from Rome, ed. by Robert Russell, et al (Vatican Observatory Publications, 1990), pp. M1-M14.
• Ernst Mayr, “What is Science?” & “How Does Science Explain the Natural World?”
• Avery Dulles, “Science and Theology,” in Russell, et al., John Paul II on Science and Religion, 9-18.
• Michael A. Hoonhout, “Thomas Aquinas and the Need for a Contemporary Theological Cosmology”
• Richard J. Blackwell, “Science vs. Religion A Conflict of Ideas or a Clash of Wills?”

Fun Reading: Flatland by Edwin Abbott, freely available online at ibiblio.org.

6. FOLLOW-ON (future) READINGS and RESOURCES:

• Barrow, John D. and Tipler, Frank J. The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.
• Beauregard, Mario, and O’Leary, Denyse. The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul. New York: HarperOne, 2008.
• Behe, Michael J. The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism. New York: Free Press (Simon and Schuster), 2007.
• Birge, Mary Katherine; Henning, Brian G.; Stoicoiu, Rodica M.M.; and Taylor, Ryan. Genesis Evolution and the Search for a Reasoned Fath. Winona, MN: Anselm Academic, 2011.
• Boyle, Elizabeth Michael. Science as Sacred Metaphor: An Evolving Revelation. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2006.
• Brown, Warren S.; Muphy, Nancey; and Malony, H. Newton. Whatever Happened to the Soul: Scientific and Theological Portraits of Human Nature. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998.
• Cannato, Judy. Radical Amazement: Contemplative Lessons from Black Holes, Supernovas, and Other Wonders of the Universe. Notre Dame: Sorin Books, 2006.
• Clayton, Philip and Peacocke, Arthur. In Whom We Live and Move and Have Our Being: Panentheistic Reflections on God’s Presence in a Scientific World. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004.
• Dudley, MD, Glenn G. Infinity and the Brain: A unified Theory of Mind, Matter, And God. Paul, MN: Paragon House, 2002.
• Garcia-Rivera, Alejandro. The Garden of God: A Theological Cosmology. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2009.
• Haught, John F. Christianity and Science: Toward a Theology of Nature. Maryknoll: Orbis, 2007.
• Haught, John F. Is Nature Enough? London: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
• Haught, John F. God and the New Atheism. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2008.
• Haught, John F. God After Darwin. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2000.
• Haught, John F. Deeper Than Darwin. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2003.
• Korsmeyer, Jerry D. Evolution and Eden: Balancing Original Sin And Contemporary Science. Mahwah: Paulist, 1998.
• Moltmann, Jürgen. Science and Wisdom. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003 (translation).
• Peacocke, Arthur. Evolution: The Disguised Friend of Faith? Philadelphia, PA: Templeton Press, 2004.
• Polkinghorne, John. The Way the World Is: The Christian Perspective of a Scientist. Louisville, Westminster John Knox, 2007 (1983).
• —– Quantum Physics and Theology: An Unexpected Kinship. New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 2007.
• Schönborn, Christoph Cardinal. Chance or Purpose: Creation, Evolution, and a Rational Faith. San Francisco: Ignatius, 2007.
• Schroeder, Gerald L. The Science of God: The Convergence of Scientific and Biblical Wisdom. New York: Broadway Books (Bantam Doubleday Dell), 1998.
• —– The Hidden Face of God: Science Reveals the Ultimate Truth. New York: Touchstone (Simon and Schuster), 2001.
• Shackleford, John M. Faith Seeking Understanding: Approaching God Through Science. New York/Mahwah: Paulist, 2007.
• Spitzer, Robert J., S.J., New Proofs for the Existence of God, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010.
• Tippett, Krista. Einstein’s God: Conversations About Science and the Human Spirit. New York: Penguin, 2010.