Church owes Darwin apology over evolution, says senior Anglican
In a bid to recognise its faults in the run up to next year's 200th anniversary of Darwin's birth, the church has launched a series of articles on its website.
An essay by the Rev Dr Malcolm Brown, the church's head of public affairs, called Good Religion Needs Good Science directly addresses Darwin. It concludes: "We try to practise the old virtues of 'faith seeking understanding' and hope that makes some amends. But the struggle for your reputation is not over yet, and the problem is not just your religious opponents but those who falsely claim you in support of their own interests.
"Good religion needs to work constructively with good science – and I dare to suggest that the opposite may be true as well."
Next year also marks 150 years since the publication of On the Origin of Species, in which Darwin outlined the theory of natural selection. This anniversary, the church says, presents an opportunity "to look back on the relationship between Darwin, his supporters and the Christian church".
comments powered by Disqus
Lisa Kazmier - 9/18/2008
Do you believe the world is flat, too? The C of E is showing far more sophistication than you. It took over 300 yrs for the RCC to aplogize to Galilleo. Looks like the education gained by the major clerics in the C of E has led them to make room for faith and science, much like a number of scientists, by the way.
Anyone who thinks species are incapable of evolution are hopelessly out of touch with reality. Do you buy last year's flu shot thinking it's "just as good"? Yeek.
Donald Wolberg - 9/17/2008
Oh my! One wonders if Mr. Smith is serious or has just discovered the alphabet (DNA, not Dna). I supect that Charles Darwin would be delighted with the abundance of data we now have that not only support his views, but enhance them likely beyond even his expectations. Mr. Smith, if he is serious, would do well to explore some of this data, and perhaps really read the "Origin."
Steven Alfred Smith - 9/17/2008
I am amazed at what the church of England has fallen to.After all the advances with Intelligent Design and the study of the life cell this is definately a step back.
I do not have an ounce of admiration for anyone who still belives in the evolutional theory(which is not even a proven theory by the way).It may of been a good idea for the intellectual types back when the book was writen(Origin of Species)If Darwin were alive today he would have admitted that his theory was proved wrong.
If you take the time to actually read the Origin of Species,Darwin wrote if the knowledge arrises that the living cell be of a complicated variety than he would have to admit he was wrong.Has anyone ever heard of Dna?The information held within Dna is wonderfully complicated.In closing if you look at a living cell the imprint of a designer is more prevelant than anyone knows.I was througn back a few steps when I seen the little engines that drive the cell.
It amazes me that evolution is taught in schools still after we have realized all the holes in the so called theory
- Did a historian who said he’s a victim of McCarthyism get the story wrong?
- Stephanie Coontz’s work on the history of marriage cited by the Supreme Court.
- How Does It Feel To Have One’s Work as a Historian Cited by the Supreme Court? Cool. Very Cool. Thank You Very Much.
- NYT History Book Reviews: Who Got Noticed this Week?
- David Hackett Fischer wins $100,000 prize for lifetime achievement in military writing