A Path of Science and Faith

This is my contribution to the 2024 Religion and Science weekend, sponsored by the Clergy Letter Project, and Boy Scout Sunday. It will also appear in the upcoming February issue of the Fishkill United Methodist Church newsletter.

——————————————————————————————–

I had no idea when I began my journey with Christ back in 1965 where it would lead or what I would do.  It wasn’t until I drove across the plains of north Missouri back in the 1990s that I was reminded that I had entered a covenant with God and that I needed to fulfill my part of the covenant.  I then began exploring ways to become a lay speaker/servant and ultimately a lay minister (A Reminder | Thoughts From The Heart On The Left (wordpress.com) – https://heartontheleft.wordpress.com/2018/02/09/a-reminder/).

Similarly, when I choose to become a chemistry major in 1966, I had no idea what I would do with the degree.  To be honest, on the day I graduated from Truman State University, I thought that I would be going to graduate school at the University of Memphis.  But I received a phone call from a local school district shortly after graduation and, a few hours later, sign a provisional contract to teach chemistry and physical science.  This diversion from graduate school to teaching would provide the impetus for my later graduate studies and the completion of my doctoral studies at the University of Iowa.

In one of my classes at Iowa, we discussed the issues of creationism and intelligent design and the impact these issues would have on science education.  This was not the first time I encountered these issues.   

In 1980, the Missouri state legislature was preparing to pass a bill that would have told biology teachers how to teach biology, by including creationism in the discussion of evolution.  I suppose I could have ignored this because I only taught chemistry, but one must be careful when individuals who do not have any knowledge of the processes of science (“The Processes of Science”) try to tell science teachers what to teach and how to teach it.  I was prepared to resign if the law passed and was surprised to find that my department chairman, a devout Southern Baptist layman and biologist, was also going to resign (No one told me: Thoughts on the relationship of science and faith | Thoughts From The Heart On The Left (wordpress.com) – https://heartontheleft.wordpress.com/2021/07/23/no-one-told-me/). 

I don’t believe that I have ever had a conflict with my faith and my science background.  I accepted the idea that God created the earth and the heavens, but I never accepted the idea that it was done in six days.  And the more I studied things, the more I began to see the hand of God present in creation.

And as my studies and work in the areas of faith and science began to converge (“The Confluence Between Religion and Science” | Thoughts From The Heart On The Left (wordpress.com) – https://heartontheleft.wordpress.com/2019/02/06/the-confluence-between-religion-and-science/) I began to discover two things.

First, those who argue for a science only or faith only approach to life do so only for their own power.  Each group seeks to impose its view on the people as the only acceptable view.

The second thing I discovered was that many of the individuals that I studied in chemistry and physics were men of God as well as men of science (A Dialogue of Science and Faith | Thoughts From The Heart On The Left (wordpress.com) – https://heartontheleft.wordpress.com/2009/12/31/a-dialogue-of-science-and-faith/).

It is entirely possible that I could or would have come to Christ without having been a Boy Scout but that is clearly a question for another time and place. Besides finding a path to God through the God and Country award, I also began to develop an appreciation for the world around us. I cannot call myself an environmentalist but clearly, having seen the beauty of the Rocky Mountains when camping with my troop and seeing the physical wonders of this country and then seeing the awesome view of galaxies far away, I know that there is a Creator out there. And if there is not a Creator, then how was this all done?  (“Removing the Veil” | Thoughts From The Heart On The Left (wordpress.com) – https://heartontheleft.wordpress.com/2013/02/11/removing-the-veil/)

I did not need to know that Boyle and Priestley were men of God to understand their work and what it meant to me as a chemist.  But knowing that their work helped them better understand how God works is also true for me.

Can I use the skills that God gave me (allowing me to use other words from Genesis that state that you and I were created in His image) and begin to work out the mysteries of the universe, from the moment of the Big Bang to the present day and perhaps far into the future?

The author and activist Stephen Mattson wrote.

Some people mistakenly believe that trusting in God requires them to distrust science, history, art, philosophy, and other forms of education, information, and truth.

But intelligence is a friend of faith, and ignorance is its enemy.  God loves knowledge and truth, and any faith that objects to either is terribly misguided.

Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., wrote,

Science investigates; religion interprets. Science gives man knowledge that is power; religion gives man wisdom that is control. Science deals mainly with facts; religion deals mainly with values. The two are not rivals. They are complementary.

In a world that is fast dividing, it is the joint study of faith and science that will be one means of bringing people together.  For as science brings us knowledge of the physical world, faith brings us an understanding of the spiritual world and together we can bring the world together.

What Shall We Do?

Here is my contribution to the November 2023 issue of the Fishkill United Methodist Church newsletter.

In view of certain world events and with Veterans’ Day this month, I want to offer some comments about what we, as Christians, can do concerning war.

My grandfather, Colonel Walter Lee Mitchell, Sr., kept a diary of his time while serving in the Army from 1918 to 1944.  The first part of the diary deals with his time in France as part of the American Expeditionary Force during World War I; the second part deals with his Army service and travels with his family following the war.

While in France he served as the adjutant for the 34^th Infantry Regiment, which was part of the 7^th Division.  While the Division did not see combat as a unit, parts of the division, including the 34^th Regiment did.  Based on information I gathered from other sources, it appears that my grandfather used his diary to draft his notes for the official reports.

As such, his thoughts about the nature of war are rather limited.  On October 11, 1918, he noted that a member of Company C was killed.  In his diary entry for October 4, 1918, he wrote “We are no longer strangers to gas”, referring to the use of chemical weapons by the Germans.  He also noted when American forces used gas as a weapon.

Perhaps the one thing that was a constant was his acknowledgment that he was far from home and his wife, my grandmother.  They were married in January 1918, approximately three months before he left for France.  He longed to receive her letters and noted the days that he received them.

On Christmas Day, 1918, Colonel Mitchell wrote the following in the diary,

December 25, 1918 – CHRISTMAS DAY in a foreign land 5,000 miles from home.  Nothing much to do, it is hell.

Perhaps Colonel Mitchell was channeling William Tecumseh Sherman who on several occasions said that war “is a terrible thing”, “is cruelty and you cannot refine it” as well as “war is hell.”).

He would return home in 1919 and serve until 1944, retiring as a Colonel.  My grandfather was one of the fortunate ones.  He came home from two wars to live in St. Louis with his wife and experience the birth of three grandsons.  He would die at home in 1955 during a period of relative peace. 

My father was commissioned as an officer in the Army Air Corps in 1943, following his graduation from Cornell University.  He served in the Southwest Pacific theater of operation with the 5^th Air Force.  While he served in combat zones, I do not believe that he saw actual combat. 

With one exception, he never discussed his experiences during World War II.  The only time he volunteered any information was to confirm the briefing he had received just prior to the proposed invasion of the Japanese mainland.  It was estimated that Allied casualties would be over a million; it was this information that convinced President Truman to use the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. 

My father served as an officer in the United States Air Force for just over twenty years, often stationed at bases that were prime targets for Soviet missiles.  My father would also die at home in 1995 in a period of relative peace. 

My mother was a secretary in the War Department (now the Defense Department) when she traveled to post-war Germany.  To the best of my knowledge, she never discussed the devastation and destruction she saw there.

What I do know is that while my parents disapproved of my anti-war activities, my father was visibly relieved when I failed my draft physical in 1971 and my mother told Petra Mitchell (her granddaughter and my niece) that she was glad that neither my two brothers nor I were drafted.

Other families were and are not so lucky.  Their fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, brothers, and sisters are sent off to war, even if it is not called a war.  Some die in faraway lands; others return home, some with visible wounds, many with invisible wounds.

They understood what the Greek philosopher Herodotus wrote,

Nobody is stupid enough to prefer war to peace.  Because in times of peace children bury their parents, whereas, on the contrary, in times of war parents bury their children.

I shall not presume to know what either of my parents or my grandfather thought about war.  My grandfather most certainly experienced the effects of combat.  Some of the pictures that Colonel Mitchell collected show the devastation and destruction of property and human life, but he very seldom wrote about those horrors.

Neither my father, who saw the destruction and devastation of Japan when he was stationed there after the war, nor my mother, who saw similar devastation and destruction when she was in Germany after the war, said anything about what they saw or experienced. 

We find that our parents, our siblings, and our friends are not willing to talk about their time in combat or combat zones.  Perhaps there is something about war that takes away the glamour.

Following the Battle of Fredericksburg, General Robert E. Lee wrote to his wife and said, “It is well that war is so terrible, or we should grow too fond of it.” (Letter dated 13 December 1862).

But I am afraid that some 160 years later, we have grown fond of war as we see it as the solution to our problems, never realizing that war only creates conditions for future wars.

War is certainly not glamourous, and it is perhaps the one activity that does not discriminate between the old and the young, the rich and the poor, sinners and the righteous.  War feeds on our fears and our anger.

When a parent loses a child, do you not think that they would like to see another parent lose their children?  And how must children feel when they lose a parent, sibling, or friend?  Do you think that they will not want to find some way for another child to lose their parents, siblings, or friends?  And thus, each generation continues the process of war.

And when we oppress people, because of their economic status, their race, their gender, or their lifestyle, does this not allow the conditions for war to fester and grow?

The patch worn by members of the 34^th Infantry Regiment shows the Cross of Lorraine (the part of France where they were stationed).  The area of Alsace-Lorraine lies between France and Germany and has been the target of wars between the two countries.  How many other areas of land on the planet are the focus of conflict between groups of people?

We have turned war into a reason; we say that we must fight to ensure our security. Yet, not too many people think we are safer or more secure today as compared to a few years ago. We see terrorists around every corner; we have bought into the argument that we must give up our rights and freedoms so that we can control terrorism.

Yet terrorism grows in the presence of fear. Terrorism grows in the slums of the world, where those without the necessities of life are taught to hate those who have them. And we do nothing to remove that cycle of violence and hate. 

In his speech to United Nations on 25 September 1961, President John Kennedy said, “Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind.” 

So, what do we, as Christians, do?  The answer was given to us in the Nazareth synagogue some two thousand years ago.

On that day some 2000 years ago, in the Nazareth synagogue, When Jesus stood before his family, friends, and neighbors and began his ministry, he noted that He had come to heal the sick, bring sight to the blind, and free the oppressed.  Are those not the same conditions that bring war?

We need to find ways to bring equitable healthcare to all people, not just a select few, not just to those who side with us.

We need to educate all the people of the world so that we are not blind to the problems of the world and are able to solve them.  And again, we must do this for all, not just for a few or those who side with us.

We need to set the prisoners free, free from the hatred that fuels war, free from conditions that allow people to seek violent solutions, free from the prison walls of economic status, race, gender, and lifestyle.

While there are some who call themselves Christian, they do not show the love that has been shown to them.  As children we memorized John 3:16, “for God so loved the world that He gave us His only begotten son.”  Are we not to show that same love to all the people of this world, even those who may hate us and seek our destruction?

The challenge is before may seem impossible and we may see it as beyond our capabilities.  In his commencement address at American University on10 June 1963, he said, “ Our problems are manmade–therefore, they can be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings. Man’s reason and spirit have often solved the seemingly unsolvable–and we believe they can do it again.

It is our time to show God’s love to all the people of the world; it is our time to fulfill the goals that Jesus laid out before us some 2000 years ago.  It is time.

We Are Destroying Our Future.

For those who do not know, I am the son of an Air Force officer and the grandson of an Army officer.  I spent most of my pre-college days living on or near Air Force Bases, many of which were prime targets for Soviet missiles (if there was to be a third World War). 

A friend of mine who was married to an Air Force officer told me once that she had been briefed that, in the event of a nuclear attack by the Soviet Union, the western portion of Missouri (where she lived at the time) would be dead within a few moments (because of the Titan II missiles and SAC bomber bases nearby) and the remainder of Missouri would probably be dead from the radioactive fallout within the week.

After a briefing at the beginning of his presidential term, President John Kennedy was told that our response to a Soviet attack would be a full and complete response with all our nuclear weapons, resulting  in the deaths of countless millions.  As he left the briefing, President Kennedy is supposed to have said to Secretary of State Dean Rusk, “and we call ourselves a civilized nation.”

The only thing that kept the Soviet Union and the United States from going to war during the 60s was the doctrine of mutually assured destruction (appropriately named MAD).  Fortunately, for our generation and the ones that followed, this doctrine kept the world at peace, albeit an uneasy one.

Today, while the destruction of the world using nuclear weapons may not be as real as it seemed in the 1960s, it is still a possibility.

We still see violence as the answer to violence.  But violence begats violence. 

From the beginning of humanity, we have sent our children off to war.  If our children are killed on the battlefield, who will be the future?  Remember what the Greek philosopher Herodotus once wrote,

Nobody is stupid enough to prefer war to peace.  Because in times of peace children bury their parents, whereas, on the contrary, in times of war parents bury their children.

And yet, that is what we do.  How can there be a future when there is no one to live in it?

And what of those who come home wounded, sometime physically, sometimes mentally?  It seems, based on our budget priorities, that we tell those who return from the battlefield to take care of themselves for we, as a society, often do not.

We have a budget where we spend more on the military-industrial complex than we do on education and development.  When you spend more on destruction than construction, there will come a time when we will not be able to rebuild this country. 

There is a feeling in this country that the budget for the military-industrial complex cannot be touched or questioned.  Funding the military-industrial complex is a way for legislators to tout their patriotism and ensure their own power and position.  Are not greed and the seeking of power other ways of destroying the future?

When the Apollo 11 mission was launched, there were those who wanted the money spent on the Apollo program to be spent on other social programs.  But this was at a time when the Viet Nam War was stripping our financial and personnel reserves at a much faster rate.  And when it came down to dollars, the Apollo program was cut because the war was becoming too expensive.

And this continues today – we fund the military-industrial complex and cut the funding for social programs.

It is not just the countless and seemingly endless wars that continue to destroy our future.  A greater threat may be our own ignorance. 

We are neglecting this world in which we live, ignoring the damage we have done to the environment, ignoring the sides of change.

We have ignored the health of this planet, this world in which we live, for too long.  Despite the claims of some, climate change is real and, if we do not act immediately, it will not be nuclear war that destroys our future, but our own ignorance.

In a world where more is spent on destruction than construction, where will get the individuals who will rebuild our country?  Where will the spark of creativity come from when monies for creativity and construction are the first to be cut.

It is my opinion that the rise in pseudo-science, climate change deniers, and anti-vaccination proponents can be attributed to a decrease in the funding for schools.

We are neglecting our youth when it comes to their education.  Our schools no longer focus on creativity and free thought, choosing to or being forced to teach the “answers in the back of the book” and not even considering how to solve problems that have not been discovered.

Perhaps because they fear the future, there are those who would prefer that our children and youth not find out who they are but rather conform to a particular set of rules.  But each person is unique, and we have seen what happens when we try to make people conform to one single set of rules.  Those who push for conformity in society do so to hold onto their power and position.

Conformity to a single set of rules ignores and increases the inequalities of society.  For there to be a future, we must be a society of equality, not inequality.

There is a moral factor involved in all of this.  The church today seems rather silent on the issue of war, education, and equality; in fact, many churches seem to want war, no education and inequality, again because it would increase their power and position.

The numbers tell us that people are moving away from the church because it tends to support the status quo.

But it must be the church which speaks out if we are to build the future, not destroy the future.

If we are to build our future, we must, individually and collectively, speak out against a society that places the military-industrial complex before the needs of the people. 

We must, individually and collectively, speak out against an educational system that does little to prepare our children and youth to solve the problems of the future, the problems that are not in the back of the book.

We must, individually and collectively, speak out against a religious system that moves us further from God’s Kingdom through the encouragement of repression and inequality.

The call to build the future is a call that must come from the church.

“I Made a Mistake.”

Published in the April 2023 issue of the Fishkill UMC newsletter. Will be published in the Spring 2023 issue of “God and Nature.”

————————————————————————————————————————–

In April 1970, I was a junior at Northeast Missouri State College (now Truman State University).  After a rather tumultuous sophomore year and a change in the academic calendar at the beginning of my junior year, I was beginning to feel things were smoothing out.

But I made a mistake.  The first Earth Day was April 22, 1970, and I ignored it.  In retrospect, I probably should have paid more attention. 

When I began writing this piece, my memories told me that nothing happened on campus. 

But thanks to Dan McGurk, one of the reference librarians at Pickler Memorial Library, I discovered that that it was an announced event, that the town of Kirksville had issued a proclamation in support of the day, and there had been a meeting of some 300 students that focused on the topic.

But my mindset was otherwise.  My academic plan was almost back on track, I was in a relationship, and I was involved in a chemical research project.  Things were looking pretty good.  And we still had the Viet Nam war to worry about (the Kent State Massacre would occur twelve days later, on May 4, 1970).

What I did not realize was that the movement that began that day was a continuation of what I had learned and done while in the Boy Scouts.  Now, I do not consider myself an environmentalist but, as anyone associated with Scouting will tell you, you cannot be involved in Scouting and not come away with an appreciation for the environment.

But one does not have to have been a Scout or be currently involved in Scouting to have an appreciation for the environment.  At the beginning of Creation, God charged humankind to take care of the earth and all that was in it (Genesis 1: 26 – 28).

For a long time, humankind held the view that the charge in Genesis to be good stewards of this world meant that we could do anything we wanted.  We dumped our trash in the streams, the rivers, lakes, and oceans, confident that there was always going to be fresh water left over.  We filled the atmosphere with noxious gases, confident that the atmosphere was big enough to diffuse the pollutants.

In our greed and ignorance, in our lack of care for the welfare of this world, we have sown the seeds of our own destruction.

Perhaps it will not be through nuclear war or some other violent process, but we are beginning to see that if we do not change our ways right now, we will destroy this world and ourselves.

The writers of the Old Testament emphasized that this world was God’s creation and that we must answer to Him when it is done. 

In Deuteronomy, God reminds us to look at what He has done for us.  At the end of the Book of Job, God reminds Job (Job 38: 1 -18) that it was He who was responsible for the creation. 

That alone should remind us of the role science has in our daily lives, for it is through science that we find the ways to take care of this world and those with whom we share its resources and space. 

We are beginning to see that what we once thought were unlimited resources are beginning to run out. 

We are also becoming aware that our continued use of fossil fuels and the emission of “greenhouse gases” such as carbon dioxide (CO₂) and methane (CH₄) have an effect not only on the physical world, but on those who live here as well.  Climate change is not just a science problem; it is a social and economic problem as well.  As the climate changes, this forces changes, welcome or not, on the people of this world. 

We have made great strides in reducing air and water pollution, but we still seem to have a cavalier attitude towards the materials we use to maintain the style of life we seem to desire.

There are solutions to the climate change problem.  There are things that one can do, individually and collectively, to counter the effects of climate change (see How Four Churches Flourish by Caring for Creation – Science for the Church – https://scienceforthechurch.org/2022/10/11/how-four-churches-flourish-by-caring-for-creation/?mc_cid=4c1d68fa2f&mc_eid=a90f1704f9) for a discussion on what individual churches have done.

But is our concern for God’s creation limited to just the physical world?  In Matthew 5: 21 – 29, Jesus speaks of the Ten Commandments and our relationship with others.  Our concern for the Earth must include how we care for those with whom we share this planet.

The solutions offered to offset climate change may not be as optimal as one would like.  It does no good to develop a solution that generates its own source of problems.  (When I was teaching introductory college chemistry courses, I would ask my students to consider the pros and cons for various alternative energy resources – see Alternative Energy Resources Reading Assignment | Thoughts From The Heart On The Left (wordpress.com) – https://heartontheleft.wordpress.com/2023/03/23/alternative-energy-resources-reading-assignment/). For example, there is a push to develop electric cars, but the batteries require minerals that must be extracted from the earth.  And the extraction of those minerals will impact those who live on the lands that will be mined.

The future belongs, as it always has, to the next generation.  But it is our generation that must teach them how to see the future.  But we have lost our ability to imagine and envision the future, preferring to live in the present and teach for the moment.

We have become quite good at answering the questions when the answers are in the back of the book. 

The recent report on the state of the climate tells us that we have time to fix the problems but to do so requires other changes as well.

We will not find the solutions to climate change, what it is doing to this world and the people who live here, in the back of the book because that book hasn’t been written yet.  And unless we change our mindset about the present educational process, that book will not be written.

We once taught people how to think analytically and creatively.  And this allowed us to go to the moon and begin to see what we were doing to this world.  We must return to this style of teaching.

Fifty-three years ago, I made a mistake because I wasn’t paying attention.  But I recognized that I had done so and have worked to correct that mistake.

Today, we have heard the voices of the modern prophets warning that we are about to make the same mistake, of ignoring the signs that we have not cared for the world that has been our task since the beginning days of humankind.    Unless we change what we are doing, unless we find new and innovative ways to meet the needs of society without endangering society, we will find that our vision and the vision of the next generation will be dark and society will come to an end.

I trust that we will not make that mistake.

Alternative Energy Resources Reading Assignment

When I was teaching introductory college courses, I would assign a series of reading assignments to be completed during the semester (in the old days, this was called “writing across the curriculum” and sometimes caused ripples because some never thought that one could do so in a chemistry class, let alone a science class.)

This particular assignment was developed about twenty years ago, but I think that it is still viable today.

————————————————————————————————————————–

What are the advantages and disadvantages for each of the following processes with reference to power production? 

1. List the major advantages and disadvantages for nuclear fusion and nuclear fission. Which of the two is currently in use in this country and where is it being used?
2. List the major advantage and disadvantages for using solar energy in power production.
3. Summarize the major advantages and disadvantages of the widespread use of wind power.
4. Identify the major advantages and disadvantages of geothermal energy.
5. What is a fuel cell? What are the advantages of fuel cells in terms of power production?

Based on your study and evaluation of the various alternative energy sources currently available, what are your conclusions about the options available to your generation?

Notes for the alternative energy resources reading assignment.

I first offered the following areas as topics for consideration in the teaching of science in In my blog post “Thoughts on the Nature of Teaching Science in the 21st Century.” 

1. Energy – not only energy production today but energy sources (renewable and non-renewable) for tomorrow
2. Global warming – if there was ever a topic that called for the public to have a knowledge of science and its role in society, it is global warming.  (“Earth’s Dashboard Is Flashing Red—Are Enough People Listening?)
3. Environmental chemistry – how we view recycling and what can go into landfills and what cannot; this would also include acid rain. I might point out that there was an article in The Journal of Chemical Education some years ago in which the instructor posed the question about the cost of recycling. The essence of the problem was “what to do with some Co²⁺ solution that was left after an analytical problem. Should the solution be diluted to a safe level and disposed of by pouring down the drain or shipped off as liquid waste; should it be precipitated and shipped off to a landfill as solid waste; or should it be recycled and used again during the next semester. The calculations for this problem are typical calculations for an introductory chemistry course and one can set up the calculations to be dependent on the size of the class. The only information that an instructor would be need would be the cost of the original raw materials as well the cost of shipping liquid and solid wastes. And, from the numbers of times that I asked my students to do these calculations, it always appears that that recycling is the best solution. (“The Educational Case for Recycling”)
4. The role of chemicals in our environment – I would include the issue of mercury and mercury compounds in the preservation of vaccines and what this may or may not do. I would also include the use of the word “organic” to mean pesticide and insecticide free produce (when all foods are organic in nature).
5. The debate for free thought in the classroom – if I was a biologist, I might have entitled this the creation/evolution debate. But to me, this issue has several impacts besides biology; it goes to the issue of free thought and what our responsibilities as scientists and educators should be. It also speaks to how we, individually, believe.

————————————————————————————————————————–

I will be referencing this page in an upcoming post – “I Made a Mistake.”

The Days We Remember

As I began this piece, I thought of a piece by the Beatles, “There are places that I remember.”  This is a very appropriate song for someone who has grown up in so many places and met so many people along the way.

But I also see my journey through time and space in terms of dates, days of special importance to me.

We all have a set of dates that we remember.  Birthdays, anniversaries, special occasions are a part of our memory.  They are dates on the calendar that mark the high points (and sometimes low points) of our lives.

I will always remember that December 23, 1950, was the date of my baptism.  I will always remember that on February 14, 1965, I became a member of the 1^st Evangelical United Brethren Church (now the 1^st UMC) of Aurora, Colorado).

And I have the letter dated March 7, 1966, that told me that I was accepted into the High School Honors Program at Northeast Missouri State Teachers College (now Truman State University).

I cannot forget July 7, 1973, or June 7, 1976, as those are the birthdays of my two daughters (Melanie Mitchell-Wexler and Meara Lee Mitchell).  And I had better not forget April 22, 1943, as that is Ann’s birthday or July 17, 1999, as that is our anniversary.

Despite their importance in my life, I do not remember the date of my high school graduation in 1968, my graduation from Truman in 1971, or my graduation for the University of Missouri in 1975.  I remember that it rained the night of my high school graduation, so our after-graduation celebration was somewhat muted.  I remember that my graduation from Missouri was on a Saturday afternoon in August and how there had been finals that morning and there were perhaps a few people in attendance who really hadn’t graduated.  I suspect that I do not remember those dates because I was expected to graduate.

I would like to say I remember receiving my doctorate from Iowa but the administration of the university where I worked wouldn’t let me travel to Iowa City, so there is no ceremony to remember.

June 6^th has a double meaning for me.  If the notes I have concerning my grandfather’s military career are correct, he was going to be promoted to brigadier general and would have commanded a unit that landed on Omaha Beach on D-Day, 6 June 1944.  But a recurring ulcer forced him to retire in 1943 and I would get a chance that many did not to know him, if but for a few years.

Senator Robert Kennedy died from an assassin’s bullet on June 6, 1968.  I was in school at Truman, so the impact of his death was not as direct or powerful as what had transpired two months earlier on April 4, 1968.

On that Thursday, four days before the beginning of Holy Week, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was assassinated.  His assassination had perhaps a bit more of an impact on me as I was living in Memphis at the time.

Slightly over one year later, I would be standing next to the leadership of the Association of Black Collegians during a sit-in of the administration building at Truman (an act that did not please my parents).  I had experienced the effects of segregation while growing up in Alabama and Tennessee, so I could not stand by when some of my college friends were treated in the same manner (see Side by Side).

It was also at that time that I began to gain a better understanding of what it meant to be a Christian (see “The Changing of Seasons”).

In a few days (depending on when you read this), we will begin Holy Week (Palm Sunday is April 10^th and Easter Sunday is April 17^th).

These dates are on our calendar because someone two thousand years ago wanted us to remember what happened.

They wanted us to remember the joy and celebration that occurred when Jesus entered the city on the day that we now call Palm Sunday. 

They wanted us to remember the anger that Jesus expressed when he threw the money changers out of the temple on Tuesday of that week.

They wanted us to remember the bewilderment they felt when they heard Jesus speak of His broken body and shed blood during their last meal together.

They really didn’t want to remember how the crowds that cheered on Sunday jeered on Friday or the sadness they felt as they saw Jesus crucified.

They really didn’t want to remember watching Jesus die on the Cross or the fear they felt because they thought that the political and religious authorities would now be looking for them.

And they really did not want to remember the feeling of hopelessness that engulfed them on Saturday as Jesus lay in the tomb and it appeared that all they had worked for the past three years seemed to be for naught.

But most important of all, they wanted us to remember the joy and excitement that came with hearing that Jesus had risen from the dead that Easter Sunday.  And they wrote this all down so that those who were not there then and people for years to follow would know what had taken place those three years in the Galilee.

They wanted us to know about the people who were healed, of the people brought back to society after being cast aside, of bringing hope and a promise to those who were lost and forgotten.

Each generation has taken the words written down some two thousand years ago and added to the story.  What will we be adding?

Will the people of the church remember what Jesus said that day in Nazareth when he began his ministry?

“The Lord’s spirit is on me;

He has ordained me to break the good news to the poor people.

He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the oppressed,

And sight for the blind.

To help those who have been grievously insulted to find dignity;

To proclaim the Lord’s new era.”

(Luke 4: 18 – 19, The Cotton Patch Gospels)

Will the people of the church remember that Jesus came, not to enforce the law, but to bring life to the law?  Will they remember that what Jesus offered gave them a path to God that the religious authorities denied them?

Will the people remember the church as being people-centered or for maintaining the status quo?

Today, some two thousand years later, I am not sure that people remember that Jesus turned no one away, that he felt compassion for all, and that he forgave those who persecuted Him.  There are many who call themselves Christian, but they do not fear the religious and political authorities for they have sought to become those individuals.  Their only desire is to persecute those who do not believe as they do or might question the tenets of faith that they hold dear.

Today, I am not sure what my classmates remember about that April day in 1968.  From comments that I have seen from some of them on Facebook, the death of Dr. King had no effect on their lives.  All the work that was done to achieve equality for all is slowly being taken apart by those who believe there is no equality among people, and they are superior.

And yet the equality the Civil Rights movement sought, and for which many died, has its very roots in the equality that Jesus sought.

Will the church be remembered for preaching that the Gospel message was for all the people and or for preaching a message of exclusion and hatred?

Will the people of the United Methodist Church remember that it was the early Methodists who started the first schools for children, who created credit unions to help the working class, provided free health care clinics to people who could not afford health care, or that they fed the hungry and visited the prisoners in jail?

Will the church be remembered for welcoming immigrants because we were once immigrants, or will it shun the immigrants because it does not want to remember?  And will people remember that those who laid the foundation of our faith were once immigrants as well?

Will the church of today be remembered as the church that fostered scientific inquiry or the church that stifled it?  Will the church be remembered for caring for God’s creation or will be it remembered for allowing it to be destroyed through war and neglect?

We have spent the last forty days preparing for this time. 

We stood at that altar at one point in our life and gave our lives to Christ.  Are we disciples of Christ or merely admirers of His work?

Are we willing to stand before the world and say, “I am a Christian!  I may not want to do the work before me, I may not want to feed the hungry; I may not want to find shelter for the homeless or clothes for the needy; I am in no position to give comfort or support for those in pain and I certainly do not want to fight oppression and persecution.  But that is what I am called to do and that is what I shall do.

On the day when we celebrate the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, how will you be remembered?

---

Notes:

Dreams of the Present, Visions of the Future | Thoughts From The Heart On The Left (wordpress.com) – https://heartontheleft.wordpress.com/2008/05/02/dreams-of-the-present-visions-of-the-future/

“This Is the Place” | Thoughts From The Heart On The Left (wordpress.com) – https://heartontheleft.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/this-is-the-place-2/

Where Were You On April 4, 1968? | Thoughts From The Heart On The Left (wordpress.com) – https://heartontheleft.wordpress.com/2016/04/04/where-were-you-on-april-4-1968/

“Let Us Finish What We Started” | Thoughts From The Heart On The Left (wordpress.com) https://heartontheleft.wordpress.com/2010/08/26/let-us-finish-what-we-started/

Two Questions

Notes on Evolution Weekend

This will be my contribution for the 2022 Evolution Weekend (11-13 February 2022).

Evolution Weekend is a celebration of Charles Darwin’s birthday and is sponsored by the Clergy Letter Project (https://www.theclergyletterproject.org/).  I have been a participant in the project since 2006.

As stated on its website, “The Clergy Letter Project is an endeavor designed to demonstrate that religion and science can be compatible and to elevate the quality of the debate of this issue.”

Evolution Weekend is an opportunity for serious discussion and reflection on the relationship between religion and science. The ongoing goal has been to elevate the quality of the discussion on this critical topic, and to show that religion and science are not adversaries. Rather, they look at the natural world from quite different perspectives and ask, and answer, different questions.

The theme for the 2022 Weekend is “The Pandemic, Climate Change and Evolution:  How Religion and Science, Working Together, Can Advance Our Understanding.”

Notes on Boy Scout Sunday

The 2^nd Sunday in February is also Boy Scout Sunday and marks the anniversary in 1965 of my becoming a member of the 1^st Evangelical United Brethren Church (now the United Methodist Church).  That year, I would complete my studies for the “God and Country Award.”  In addition to being my contribution to the Clergy Letter Project, this also represents my continuance of the journey with Christ that I began that Sunday in 1965.

Lectionary Readings for the Sixth Sunday after the Epiphany (Year C), 13 February 2022

Jeremiah 17: 5 – 10

1 Corinthians 15:12-20

Luke 6: 17 – 26

Two Questions

Two Questions, Part 1

We are, by nature, curious creatures.  We continually search for a better understanding of who we are, the world on which we live, and the universe through which we travel.  We look around and wonder “why?”  And then we ask “how?”

For many years, we had one answer to both questions.  But the more we searched for the answers to these questions, the more we discovered that when we understood “why”, we did not know “how”.  And we found that knowing “how” could not tell us “why”.

Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) believed that there were three levels of living in the world: The physical, the intellectual, and the spiritual. He called them the realms of the body, mind, and heart.

We began calling the process of asking “how” science and the process of finding out “why” faith and/or religion. 

We discovered that science and faith were open systems.  It seemed as if the more we discovered, the more there was to discover.

At first, we tried to use the one to explain the other, but this didn’t always seem to work.  It began to seem as if the answer for each question conflicted with each other.  But these conflicts were not conflicts of knowledge or understanding what knowledge was true and what knowledge was not.  Rather, this was a conflict of power, with each side declaring that their understanding was true and the other heretical or false.

But, as expressed in the Old Testament reading for this Sunday (Jeremiah 17: 5 – 10), we need both science and faith to completely understand the world around us.  Note that in verse 10, the author of Jeremiah wrote “I, God, search the heart and examine the mind.

Albert Einstein offered the view that “Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind” (“Science, Philosophy and Religion: a Symposium”, 1941).

In a 1959 sermon, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said,

“There may be a conflict between softminded religionists and toughminded scientists,” he said. “But not between science and religion. Their respective worlds are different, and their methods are dissimilar. Science investigates; religion interprets. Science gives man knowledge which is power; religion gives man wisdom which is control. Science deals mainly with facts; religion deals mainly with values. The two are not rivals. They are complementary.”

“A tough mind and a tender heart”

Dr. King would add,

“Science keeps religion from sinking into the valley of crippling irrationalism and paralyzing obscurantism,” he said. “Religion prevents science from falling into the marsh of obsolete materialism and moral nihilism.” 

Martin Luther King, Jr. On Science And Religion (forbes.com)

Ian Barbour, 1999 Templeton Prize winner, suggested that the relationship between science and religion was one of four possibilities:

1. That they fundamentally conflict,
2. That they are separate domains,
3. That the complexity of science affirms divine guidance, and
4. Finally — the approach he preferred — that science and religion should be viewed as being engaged in a constructive dialogue with each other.

Barbour would later write,

“This requires humility on both sides. Scientists have to acknowledge that science does not have all the answers, and theologians have to recognize the changing historical contexts of theological reflection”

Obituary of Ian Barbour, New York Times, January 13, 2014

We must realize that science and faith use language in different ways.  The language of faith and its use of images, parables, and paradoxes is more that of poetry than of science.  The language of faith should be seen as complimentary to the language of science (from Nobel-Winning Physicist Niels Bohr on Subjective vs. Objective Reality and the Uses of Religion in a Secular World – The Marginalian).

In his sermon entitled “Keep Moving From This Mountain,” King embraced this idea even further.

“Through our scientific genius we made of the world a neighborhood, but we failed through moral commitment to make of it a brotherhood, and so we’ve ended up with guided missiles and misguided men,” he said. “And the great challenge is to move out of the mountain of practical materialism and move on to another and higher mountain which recognizes somehow that we must live by and toward the basic ends of life. We must move on to that mountain which says in substance, ‘What doth it profit a man to gain the whole world of means — airplanes, televisions, electric lights — and lose the end: the soul?'”

That the views of science and faith ae complimentary views of the world should return us to the beginning when Adam was tasked with the care of God’s creation.

The name “Adam” has several meanings; it is the name of one individual but within the context of Genesis, it meant to represent the whole of humankind, in other words, our ancestors.

Two Questions, Part 2

What is God’s creation?  Is it just this world on which we are temporary inhabitants?  Or is it how we relate to those with whom we share this space?

Today, in 2022, we are in the 2^nd year of a pandemic, we are seeing the effects of climate change, and battles in the classroom over the teaching of climate change and evolution.  We have discovered that these are not merely academic topics but ones that affect all layers of society.

“I used to think that top environmental problems were biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and climate change. I thought that thirty years of good science could address these problems. I was wrong. The top environmental problems are selfishness, greed and apathy, and to deal with these we need a cultural and spiritual transformation and we scientists don’t know how to do that…”

Gus Speth, US Advisor on climate change and Yale professor (“Shared Planet: Religion and Nature, BBC Radio 4 (1 October 2013) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/b03bqws7)

How do we respond?  My first response, as a former United Methodist lay speaker/pastor, is to say that we must radically reorient our priorities.  For too long, we, as nations, societies, and as humans, have spent more on destruction than construction.  We have taken Adam’s task to take care of God’s creation to mean that we could do whatever we wanted.  It does no good to speak of the future if we are dedicated to the destruction of the present.

As a chemist and science educator, I would argue that we must have education systems in place that allow the development of new ideas.  This will also be radical departure from the present system that teaches that all the problems have been solved and the answers are in the back of the book.  We must realize that book of answers hasn’t been written yet.

In the end, the world which we see with two views is still one world.

The poet T. S. Elliott wrote,

We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time

T.S. Eliot, from “Little Gidding,” Four Quartets (Gardners Books; Main edition, April 30, 2001) Originally published 1943.”

Two Questions, Part 3

When I began this manuscript, the two questions were “how?” and “why?”.  Now, at the completion of this manuscript the two questions must be (with respects to Rabbi Hillel “if not now, when?” and “if not me, who?”,

What Gifts Did You Received? What Will You Do with Them? Thoughts for the Epiphany of the Lord

Let me begin by asking two questions.  First, how many “wise men” or Magi visited the Baby Jesus?  And second, why were the gifts that they brought gold, frankincense, and myrrh?

We tend to think that there were three because three gifts were given.  But in most translations of Matthew’s Gospel, there is no mention of how many came.  In Eastern tradition, the number is set at 12.  And, in the manner of the time, there is no mention if there were any women or children in the entourage.

Who were the Magi?  Again, we have no records to tell us who they were, and it is only in legend that three of the Magi are named.

And why were the gifts given gold, frankincense, and myrrh?  Some suggest that the gold was used to finance the family’s escape from Herod into Egypt and the frankincense and myrrh represented the preparation of Jesus’ body when he died.

But Herod’s wrath that would lead to Joseph, Mary, and the Baby Jesus fleeing to Egypt did not occur until after the Magi left.  And no matter how wise the Magi would have been, I don’t think they would have given materials used for the preparation of a body for burial as a birthday gift.  In addition, because of their shelf life, I don’t think that the frankincense and myrrh would have lasted for thirty-some years.

It was convenient for Matthew to write his Gospel with those events in mind because he was writing some seventy years after the birth of Jesus.  But many traditions, just like myths, have an element of truth in them.

Gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh were gifts present to a newborn king, whom the Magi had sought out.  And after the Magi had left, Joseph could have sold the frankincense and myrrh to fund the trip to Egypt and the gold would have probably provided enough funds to allow them to settle in while Joseph found work until it was safe for the family to return to Nazareth.  (In modern day terms, the Magi started a “GoFundMe’ account for the family.)

In giving Jesus their gifts, they ensured that we would have a future.  I am sure that someone will point out that if the Magi had not been there, God would have seen to it that someone was there.  But it was the Magi who saw the signs of Jesus’ birth and it was the Magi that sought out the newborn baby.  It was their gifts that enabled the future to be what it became.

As we look into the mists of tomorrow, what future do we see?  What we can see does not bode well. 

The issues we face today are more than those that arise from our lack of concern for the environment.  The pandemic has exposed our lack of concern for those with whom we share this planet.  And it is evident that the lives of everyone on this planet are tied to the condition of this world.

We are reminded that as descendants of Adam and Eve, we have inherited the task of caring for God’s Creation.  And quite honestly, it would seem we haven’t done a good job in that regard. 

In 1974, the writer Ursula Le Guin wrote,

My world, my Earth is a ruin. A planet spoiled by the human species. We multiplied and fought and gobbled until there was nothing left, and then we died. We controlled neither appetite nor violence; we did not adapt. We destroyed ourselves. But we destroyed the world first.

Ursula K. Le Guin, The Dispossessed (1974) (from Verse & Voice, 9/17/21)

We have seen the consequences of not caring for this world.  What was the Hudson River like some twenty years ago?  What was the quality of air in New York City?  Even today, we are still dealing with the consequences of our thoughts that we can bury our waste or throw it into the rivers or oceans.

And we do not need the myriad reports telling us that climate change is real, for all we must do is reflect on the changes we have seen in the past few years. 

Despite the claims of some, climate change is real and the result of what we, the inhabitants of this planet, have done. 

Human-induced climate change is already affecting many weather and climate extremes in every region across the globe.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (August 2021)

The scientific consensus on climate change is genuine, credible, and robust. It is no wonder that those who have ideological and pecuniary motives for denying the existence of anthropogenic climate change are eager to deny the existence, extent, and legitimacy of the scientific consensus, and that these denials threaten the integrity of public science education. Likewise, it is no wonder that the integrity of public science education both demands and benefits from a vigorous assertion, explanation, and defense of the scientific consensus on climate change.

Glenn Branch, Deputy Director, National Center for Science Education, Inc. in “Teaching Climate Change by Leveraging Scientific Consensus to Dispel Social Controversy”, California Journal of Science Education (https://journal.cascience.org)

What are we doing to alleviate the conditions that lead to poverty and injustice?  Do we find ways to put into practice the tasks that Jesus laid before the people that day some 2000 years ago in the Nazareth synagogue? (Luke 4: 18)

I do not know what gifts you received for Christmas, but I do know what gifts you received when you opened your heart, soul, and mind to Christ.  Some received the gift of teaching; others received the gift of prophesy.  Some will use their gifts to heal others or find ways to encourage others.  Some will use their gifts to help others through counseling and understanding.  Each person will find a way to use the gifts that they received when they accepted the Presence of the Lord in our lives.

We stand at the crossroads of time.  One path leads to a future of destruction and despair; the other path leads to a future of hope, renewal, and promise.  How we use our gifts will decide what path we take.

Borrowing a thought from fifty years ago and with acknowledgement to Reinhold Niebuhr (I first posted this on Facebook on 18 August 2019),

Are we so deaf that we cannot hear the cries of the people, no matter who they are?

Are we so blind that we cannot see the damage we are doing to this planet, our home?

Are we so dumb that we will never learn that what we do changes the future, in ways we cannot understand?

Today, I pray that we will open our ears and hear the cries of the people. I pray that we will respond.

Today, I pray that we will open our eyes and see new ways, new roads to the future.

Today, I pray that we will open our minds and let the power of the Holy Spirit empower us to use our gifts of mind and heart to make sure that we can walk the new roads to the future.

No one told me: Thoughts on the relationship of science and faith

The following was published in the Fall, 2021, issue of “God & Nature – https://godandnature.asa3.org/mitchell-no-one-told-me.html

No one told me in 1965, when I chose to walk with Jesus Christ as my Savior, that I could not study mathematics and science.

No one told me a year later, when I declared chemistry as my major area of study, that I would have to give up my faith.

Over the years, as I grew in my understanding of my faith and my vocation, no one told me that they were mutually exclusive. 

I do remember someone telling me that the earth was only 6000 years old because of the work Bishop Ussher had done in 1650 to pinpoint the beginning of creation at nightfall on 23 October 4004 BC.  But I remember that Jesus told the people to look around to see if he was the Messiah, so when I looked at the evidence for the beginning of Creation, I knew there was something wrong with that date (among other things, it is far too specific for the data that was used).  And all I could think was that God would not lie about the evidence before us and I should not accept false evidence as a matter of faith.

In 1980, the Missouri state legislature was preparing to pass a bill that would have told biology teachers how to teach biology, by including creationism in the discussion of evolution.  I suppose I could have ignored this because I only taught chemistry, but one must be careful when individuals who do not have any knowledge of the processes of science (“The Processes of Science”) try to tell science teachers what to teach and how to teach it.  I was prepared to resign if the law passed and was surprised to find that my department chairman, a devout Southern Baptist layman and biologist, was also going to resign. 

Galileo was tried and convicted by the Catholic church for refusing to accept the prevailing idea of the time and dictates of the church (that the earth was the center of the universe).  He was told not to push the issue, but he did and the church, with the support of the academic establishment whose reputation was based on the geocentric universe, took their revenge.

I was not told, in part because it was not part of the curriculum, that Newton was an alchemist and, had people known what he wrote, a heretic.  Newton, along with Robert Boyle (considered the father of modern chemistry), wrote extensively on the topic of religion.  Newton went so far as to predict of the end of times to begin in 2060.

I was not told that Joseph Priestley, one of the discoverers of oxygen, was a founder of Unitarianism and that he fled England for America when members of the church establishment burned down his home and church.

And yet their work in science was directed towards better understanding God.

There are others who share a life of faith and science.  John Polkinghorne, a noted nuclear physicist, became a minister in the Church of England in 1982.  Georges Lemaître, a Roman Catholic priest and mathematician, looked at the theory of relativity equations prepared by Albert Einstein and developed the mathematical idea for the “Big Bang”.  I knew of the “Big Bang” but only recently discovered that a noted theoretical physicist and an atheist, Fred Hoyle, coined the term because he feared the discovery would support the idea of creation expressed in Genesis 1. 

We are told that there is a conflict between science and faith but the only ones who suggest this are the ones whose power lies in telling others what to do. 

We are reminded that Adam was tasked with the care of the Garden of Eden and that, as his descendants, we are tasked with caring for this world.  And yet there are those, especially secular and sectarian fundamentalists, who say that climate change is false.

Faith and science both share the same characteristics – we see things and ask why; we ask why and seek answers. 

Despite the claims of some, science cannot answer all the questions we might have about this world.  Science has no way to answer the question of the matter of good and evil or why we are here.  Science cannot tell us “Why”, only “how”.  The Bible does tell us why and who we are, but it cannot, nor should it ever be a science textbook.

Over the years, there have been many who have tried to tell me how to believe and what to believe but the ones who speak the truth are the ones who do not tell you what to believe but show you the path so you can find the answers that vex and bewilder you.

I think about Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health.  Raised as an atheist (or better stated, a non-believer), he was faced with a series of questions about faith.  It was a United Methodist minister who offered the guidance that allowed Dr. Collins to come to Christ.

I will never, I hope, tell you what to believe or say that your belief system does not work.  I am still learning about my faith, so I am not able to tell you how to find yours.  But I will help you find the way to the answers.

“To Seek Freedom and Truth, We Must Ask ‘Why?’”

Here are my thoughts for July 4, 2021

---

Lectionary readings

• Jeremiah 33:14-18
• Jeremiah 31:31-34 Messiah and New Covenant
• 2 Samuel 5:1-5
• 2 Samuel 5:9-10
• Ezekiel 2:1-7
• 2 Corinthians 12:2-10
• Mark 6:1-13

The focus of the message will be John 8: 31 – 47

---

Some two thousand years ago, Jesus stood before a gathering of religious and political leaders and told them that to be free they needed to seek the truth.  But these leaders scoffed at the notion they were not free, claiming that through Abraham, they had gained their freedom.

But their freedom was, at best, illusionary.  They had constructed a legal environment that limited their actions.  They had forgotten that the dietary rules they so strictly enforced came from health concerns during the Exodus and were not necessarily a requirement for faith.  They had criticized Jesus for healing someone on the Sabbath while ignoring that it was permissible for a farmer to take care of an ailing animal.  There were also angry that Jesus sought to open a society that they sought to close.

These religious and political leaders were also blind to the realization that their power, their position, their prestige, and place in society were dependent on their subservience to the Roman political authorities.  In maintaining their lifestyle, they were slaves to the Roman political authority.

Spiritually and politically, they were not free but slaves to their prejudices, bias, and desire for power.

Two hundred and forty years ago, Thomas Jefferson sat in a hot and sweltering hotel room in Philadelphia and wrote what many consider the most radical of all political manifestos, a statement that the people have the right to determine their own freedom.  He wrote of the self-evident truth that all men are created equal and endowed with certain inalienable rights.

Even today, there is much debate what Jefferson was thinking when he wrote those words.  Over time, we have come to see that singular phrase, that “all men are created equal,” be all inclusive, meaning everyone, regardless of gender, sexual identity, financial status, race, creed, or color.

President John Kennedy once noted,

“the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened.”

Some 245 years later, we struggle to achieve that equality as there are those whose view of equality is limited and who see an expansion of equality as a threat to their power and prestige.

As a science educator, I see a society that hesitates to seek the future, trying desperately to stay in the status quo, forgetting, as Heraclitus noted,

“No man steps in the same river twice, for it’s not the same river and he’s not the same man.”

The ruling class saw Jesus as the son of a working man, incapable of deep theological thought.  Somehow, they had forgotten that some twenty years before, Jesus has confounded and astonished the religious elite in the Temple.  It should be noted that the changes in physics in the early 20^th century, changes that allowed the development of much of today’s technology, came not from the physics establishment but by younger physicists not bound by the boundaries imposed by the physics of that time.

Today, we are faced with many problems, problems that threaten our freedom as individuals, as a society, and as inhabitants of this planet. 

They are problems of science (climate change, a pandemic, a need for alternative energy); they are problems of equality, in all its forms.  Despite the cries and efforts of a minority, these are man-made problems, and as President John Kennedy noted, can be solved by man.

These problems require that we begin (again) asking the most fundamental question of all, “Why?”

As I noted in “Tell Me The Truth, But. . .”, I am the grandson of an Army officer and the son of an Air Force officer.  This gave me a view of the world different from my many classmates.  And I crossed the boundary from eleven to twelve, the age at which Samuel answered the call from God and Jesus debated the teachers in the Temple, I answer to call from God.

By the time I came to Memphis in 1966, I had chosen to walk two paths, one of faith and one of science.  Each of these paths leads to a definition of the truth.  I do believe there are several truths, some are found in the spiritual world, others are found in the physical world.  To seek the truth should be each person’s goal and the distillation of the facts to their simplest components is how we find that one single truth.  There may be a hint of Eastern mysticism in that, I am not sure (adapted from Yellow Lines and Dead Armadillos | Thoughts from The Heart On The Left (wordpress.com). 

Let me just say that I am not interested in the post-modern definition of truth where one’s version of truth may differ from someone else’s.  That is for others in a different time and place.

The search for the truth in the physical world depends, in fact, demands that we ask “why?”

As a chemist, I know that there are certain fundamental truths, but these truths have changed over time as we have delved deeper and deeper into the nature of matter.  We have gone from indivisible particles called atoms to the discovery of the particles present at the beginning of the universe.  We have gone from an understanding of matter as simply being a combination of earth, air, fire, and water, to a collection of 118 elements that promises, with the development of new technologies and a better understanding of the technology, to continue to grow.

And just as there is a certain set of fundamental truths for the physical world, there is also a certain set of fundamental truths in the spiritual world.  These, I believe, are more difficult to discover for one must find themselves first. 

Part of the difficulty lies in the things that constitute the basis for this truth are often not visible or measurable (as might be the existence of atoms or elements).  President Jimmy Carter once noted,

What are the things that you cannot see that are important?  (2 Corinthians 4:18) I would say justice, truth, humility, service, compassion, love.  You cannot see any of those but they’re the guiding lights of a life.” – https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/does_power_corrupt_everyone_equally

It is not my responsibility to tell you how to think or what to believe; it is my responsibility, my duty, to show you how to answer the question of “why?” 

In 1969, I was a college sophomore struggling with the demands of college life, searching for meaning in my life.  Against that backdrop, I was beginning to ask how a Gospel message of hope and promise worked in a world of war, hatred, poverty, and ignorance.  As I prepared to travel to my home in Memphis for the Spring break, I asked my pastor, Marvin Fortel, if I could meet with him and take communion.  During the communion, I came to discover the true meaning of God’s grace.

That day, so many years ago, I came to understand that I work for justice and freedom, not because it will get me into Heaven but because it is my responsibility as a citizen of the Kingdom of God (adapted from “The Changing of Seasons”).

. . . it is not the task of Christianity to provide easy answers to every question but to make us progressively aware of a mystery. God is not the object of our knowledge but the cause of our wonder — Based on Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia, author 0f The Orthodox Way  

When I was in college and on my own (as it were), I figured that I would be able to sleep late on Sunday mornings and skip out on church.  But then I discovered that I needed to be in church.  College brought up a lot of questions, some about chemistry, some about calculus, one or two about English and history.  But there were also a lot of questions about who I was and I found that the answers to those questions came when I was in church. 

I was lucky.  The pastors that I meet and worked with in college didn’t give me the answers to those questions.  They showed me the way to find the answers on my own. (Adapted from “Now It Is Your Turn!”)

There were some pastors, of course, who will tell you what the answers to the questions are and that you are not to question those answers.  I genuinely believe that had these individuals been my guide, I would have, as so many are doing today, left the church and the faith.

In a way, I still seek the truth, both in the physical world and in the spiritual realm.  And as I help others answer their own questions of “why?”, so too do I find the freedom that comes from seeking the truth.

In the Star Trek movie, “Resurrection”, Geordi La Forge, the Chief Engineer of the Enterprise, asked Captain Picard if the regaining of his sight was worth it if others lose their homes and lives.  Our search from truth and freedom cannot come at the expense of others.  Rather our search from truth and freedom will come when we help others seek the same goals, to answer the same questions, all that being with “why?”