MC’s weekend religious exposure

I visited family this weekend. It’s stressful and relaxing at the same time. I am always fed well and treated pretty nicely, but it’s difficult dealing with the noise of a crowded house and little kids.

Anyway, I went to church for the first time since the last time, and I had some comments on it. Last time I was at this church (a very conservative one in Northern VA), the priest homilized about Richard Feynman. Being a physics guy, this piqued my interest. I don’t remember the exact content, but he mentioned that Feynman only accepted things for which there was scientific evidence, and therefore didn’t really know what the true nature of the universe was. He went to his deathbed with a lot of uncertainty about the world we live in. The message that priest sent was that we as a people should feel sorry for Feynman, because those with true beliefs will have some comfort in their final moments. This offended me a bit, because I’m sure Feynman died contently. Sure, he didn’t get to go to Tuva like he always wanted to, but he lived a full life and held beliefs that were internally consistent and satisfying to him. He wouldn’t ask us to be sorry for him that we don’t really know if there’s a God.

Anyway, fast forward to last weekend. Somehow, science crept into the pastor’s homily again, and I wish he would stop it. The talk went something like this: most Catholics believe in Jesus and his teachings, and that he’s the Messiah and all, but a large number of them don’t believe in the resurrection as a historical fact. Wouldn’t it be nice, he said, if there were some sort of scientific evidence proving that the resurrection really happened?

According to him, there is, and it’s the Shroud of Turin. I’m not gonna go into what this is exactly, but apparently if you photograph it, an image of Jesus will appear. The claim was that this image was planted by God to satisfy the future scientific curiosity of humans, as it gives a picture of what Jesus looked like (the pastor’s claim was that the shroud’s picture can tell us what color his skin was, how tall he was, how much he weighed, etc., but we didn’t get those details). Apparently, “modern science” can’t figure out how it works.

My problems with this are manifold. First off, I’m sure not just any scientific outfit can grab a piece of this and do tests on it, so “modern science” isn’t done with it by any means. Also, even if this cloth shows a perfect Kodak photo of Jesus, it would not give direct evidence that he rose from the dead. Such a strange, supernatural act couldn’t be captured in a single piece of “film.”

Anyway, I guess my point is that if religion is gonna be just religion, fine. I just get a little miffed when religious authorities appeal to scant pieces of science to back up their claims. They’ll use some studies of the shroud to prove a resurrection, yet deny or qualify other scientific findings about the age of the universe, evolution, and other things. If you’re gonna have faith, then have the faith. Don’t drag science into it if you’re not gonna go all the way.

– MC