John W Templeton Student Internship

Student Internship
John Templeton Foundation
Radnor, PA

The John Templeton Foundation and its new Division, Templeton Venture Philanthropy Associates, is seeking a student intern for the summer of 2003.

The Foundation awards grants around the globe for projects that involve science and religion, spirituality and well-being, character development in youth, and free enterprise. A flavor of some of this work is on the Foundations website. Suitably qualified students might assist in a range of research-related tasks that might include searches of the WWW, statistical analyses, project design and day-to-day management, survey administration, and econometric modeling. Interns work a minimum of 10 hours per week to a maximum of 40 hours. Compensation will be determined based on background and whether academic credit is being sought.

Interested students should send a brief resume highlighting skills and work experience and a short cover letter in Word format to Marta Oliver at moliver@templeton.org. Questions may also be directed to this e‑mail address. Please do not call the Foundation.

Jesus — A Level 5 Leader

If you’ve never read anything by Jim Collins, he’s a former prof at Stanford who’s hit it big (huge would be a more accurate term) in the world of business writing. His two books Built to Last and Good to Great are devoured by business leaders hungry for an edge.

In the latter book, Collins talks about the cruciality of level 5 leadership. Level 5 leaders combine humility and strength in a surprisingly potent package. I found this excerpt from an interview with him fascinating:

I have absolutely no religious background at all, which gives me more confidence in the findings. If I had come from a strong religious background, I’d be more suspicious. After the book came out, I kept hearing people say to me, “There was this ultimate Level 5 leader who lived 2,000 years ago. The things he talked about in the Gospel have great compatibility with what you say.” Of course I had heard about Jesus, but as a result of finding out about Level 5, I was inspired to begin reading the New Testament to see for myself. read the whole interview

The Cold Reaches of Heaven

Sojourner Magazine just ran an article about Nobel laureate William Phillips called The Cold Reaches of Heaven. Phillips is a Christian, and he has something interesting to say about the relationship between science and religion:

“I’m not an anomaly,” he says emphatically. “In fact, I would say that if you were to ask, the majority of physicists would answer that they believe in God in one form or another. Maybe not in exactly the same way that I do, because I believe in a personal God, but God in one form or another.”

in a later section he comments:

“If I want to know how the universe went through its stages of development, I ask observational astronomy and theoretical cosmology,” says Phillips. “If I want to know why are we here, why is there a universe in the first place, or what is the nature of my relationship to my Creator, I turn to the Bible. But when I study cosmology as a science, when I study physics, one of the things that I learn is that there are very clear, beautifully simple laws that describe almost everything that I observe. I see that kind of simplicity and beauty, and I think, this is a put-up job, this didn’t happen by chance.” Phillips laughs.

“That’s a way in which science informs my faith. I don’t want to compartmentalize them, but I am clear that there are questions that are well-posed to science and questions that are well-posed to religion. But they’re not completely separate entities.”

FYI: I’ve updated our list of famous scientists who are Christian with a link to the article.

Galileo And The Pope: Perspectives

Check out this brief interview with Professor Lindberg (history of science prof at Wisconsin-Madison) Did Martin Luther Get Galileo in Trouble?

How did the church respond to Galileo’s theory?
There was a committee established called the Holy Office, which had the responsibility to determine the truth in matters of faith. Charges were leveled against Galileo, and so the heliocentric question came before them.

We don’t know much about what went on in their considerations. But it’s important to look at the whole picture. And one part of that picture is that the scientific community is overwhelmingly opposed to Galileo. That is, the evidence that Galileo has is not particularly powerful. It’s not overpowering. He was looked on as a crackpot by lots of scientists.

If we combine this picture with the authority of the Catholic Church to interpret the Bibleand their new attention to literal interpretationit’s just clear what the answer is going to be. They’re not going to violate their own hermeneutic exegetical standards in order to adopt this crackpot minority opinion of the scientific community.

So then he goes before a papal court. It wasn’t his science that was on trial, though. What was he tried for?
Obedience was the only issue in the trial. And he was guilty. Everybody could tell he was guilty because Galileo doesn’t just discuss the pros and cons of the theory, he just advocates all the way. It was a blunder on Galileo’s part.

Galileo then recants. Why?
He had two choices. There was the threat of imprisonment or he could recant. Everybody knew it was a formality, so he didn’t cost his cause anything to recant.

How did the theory of the sun as the center of the universe finally get accepted by the church?
Once Newton’s theory of gravitation came along, you had overwhelming arguments in favor of heliocentrism. The church says, “Okay, now we’ve got proof, so now we will reinterpret the Bible.”

By the end of the 17th century, the church was on board, though Copernicus’s book stayed on the index of prohibited books until 1835. This geocentric model remained an albatross around the Catholic Church’s neck.

Interesting stuff.

More Scientists Who Believe

I just ran across a link for the American Scientific Affiliation: a fellowship of men and women in science and disciplines that relate to science who share a common fidelity to the Word of God and a commitment to integrity in the practice of science.

They have an absolutely incredible respository of articles and links to resources. If you’re in the sciences, you need to check this out!

The Groves of Academe: When Disrespect is Respectful

Darryl Hart, academic dean at Westminster Theological Seminary, weighs in with a contrarian perspective on Christian academics in an essay titled The Groves of Academe: When Disrespect is Respectful.

Well, contrarian for an evangelical.

He argues that modern universities have no place for Christian scholarship, and appropriately so: If believing scholars could recognize hostility to faith as the academy’s highest form of flattery, in other words, if they could acknowledge the ways in which Christ and culture are legitimately at odds, they might understand why some habits die hard. They might even discover the plausibility of certain anti-religious prejudices.

Incidentally, this essay is a response to Force of Habit and Special Pleading (both are also quite interesting, and take different perspectives).

A Student’s Guide To Liberal Learning

I just read a marvelous essay by James Schall (a priest and professor at Georgetown) called A Student’s Guide to Liberal Learning (link found from the author’s homepage, which I ran across courtesy of the Claremont Institute). It’s simply outstanding (although I found the style a little odd at times).

Schall argues that students must take responsibility for their own learning. Two passages serve as a decent introduction:

When a student arrives at a university, especially a prestige [sic] one, he will probably think that what he is about to study will be the best that he can possibly come by. He naturally expects that what he is getting is, in fact, his “money’s worth”, as they say.… This particular essay is not written for students who have no problems with the system or who, even less, do not want to find any. They will never know the difference. They will never doubt that what they are being taught is anything but the high quality stuff that it is touted to be in the brochures and media or, apparently, confirmed by the high cost of their tuition. Often however, from one’s religious or philosophical background, from one’s family, perhaps from a friend or a teacher or from something that one chanced to read or see, a young man or woman will be at least alert and, hopefully, begin to suspect that all is not well in academia, or in the culture, or, for that matter, in one’s own soul.

and also

E. F. Schumacher, in his great book, A Guide for the Perplexed, tells of going to Oxford as a young man, that is, of going to what was thought to be the greatest university of his time. He discovered that what was taught and discussed there bore little meaning and truth to him. Schumacher was forced to look elsewhere for some semblance of an education that dealt with the highest things, that took seriously what the great philosophical and religious minds really were talking about, issues that he already felt pressing in his own soul but were never addressed in the great university.

And one last observation which I found particularly interesting: In spite of most of what a student will read on the topic, revelation seeks reason, is addressed to mind and fosters it. The Bible simply has profound things to tell us, things we clearly ought to know. We now have students in class, moreover, even those who have gone to church or synagogue all their lives, who have not the faintest accurate idea about what is said in Scripture, a work that almost every generation before this era has read carefully either to understand or to dispute or to live by.

If you find Schall’s essay helpful, you might also want to read my earlier posting on Becoming Wise In College.

The Faith of a Scientist

From an interview at Christianity Today: John Polkinghorne worked for years as a theoretical elementary particle physicist and then a mathematical physics professor at Cambridge University before resigning to train for ministry in the Church of England. Earlier this year, he was awarded the 2002 Templeton Prize for progress in religion…

Polkinghorne on whether science and faith are compatible: “I’ve never felt an either/or situation that I had to choose either my science or my religious belief. Of course, there are puzzles about how the two relate to each other, and I tried to think about those during my science days. And, of course, I’ve thought a great deal more about them since then.

“I try to hold the two together as far as I can myself. I want to be, so to speak two-eyed: looking through my science eye and my religious eye at the same time. I’m glad that I’m both a physicist and a priest and, though I’m puzzled by how those aspects of me fit together, I want to hold them in dialogue with each other.” (read the whole thing)

Legal Rights Are Rooted In Divine Laws

Michael Novak has an interesting column arguing that it’s in our national self-interest to realize that there is an intrinsic connection between the widespread sense of religious conviction in America and the freedoms we enjoy.

Specifically, Novak argues that Christianity provides a unique foundation for the concept of individual rights. Read all about it

(I should mention that it’s in the context of an anti-ACLU polemic).