Why is Cosmology Important for Ecumenists?

I want to return to the theme of science for a few posts.  (I will return to ecumenism's modern history; this diversion is to allow time to re-read Called to be One). 

I had a conversation the other day about Christian interpretations of evolution and it was suggested I should write down my ideas.  I'll start to do that in my next post.  But first, I aim to review how my thnking has moved on since I left this topic last summer. 

I suggest the reader might read my post Ecumenism and Science  and follow some of the links. 

I believe the future of global ecumenism, must include conversations about cosmology.  I have already noted  how cosmology has changed several times since first century Christianity.  The time for a similar change is overdue; quantum mechanics was developed in the 1920s, followed by complexity theory later in the century.  These two disciplines alone have profound implications for the Christian faith.

Why is this an important theme for ecumenists?

1. It is essential for the credibility of the Christian faith.  I have elsewhere  quoted Karen Armstrong in The Case for God : One of the psalms for example, clearly reflects the ancient view, long outmoded by Augustine's time, that there was a body of water above the earth that caused rainfall.  It would be absurd to interpret this text literally.  God had simply accommodated the truths of revelation to the science of the day so that the people of Israel could understand it; today, a text like this must be interpreted differently.  Whenever the literal meaning of scripture clashed with reliable scientific information, Augustine insisted, the interpreter must respect the integrity of science or he would bring scripture into disrepute.  We live in a sceptical age and it is wrong to unnecessarily make things difficult for those who are not believers, by cluttering our faith with impossible beliefs.  Armstrong shows theologians, for most of Christian history, have taken this view.  It is not the content of our belief so much as the quality of our relationship with God that matters.  Our cosmology might change as our perspective on the universe changes, but our walk with God remains substantially the same as it ever was.
2. Our faith is distorted when we refuse to accept the findings of science.  When people believe untruths, they actively seek evidence for their view.  There is no such evidence and so the facts have to be distorted to fit their view.  We all do this to some extent but the implications for the Christian faith can be dismal.  From the fundamentalist idea that the years in the Genesis genealogies actually mean centuries, through to the idea that dinosaurs and humans co-existed, the Christian faith is made a laughing stock.
3. The good news is modern science supports the Christian faith, including evolution, even the Dawkins version.  When we pretend otherwise we are making life unnecessarily difficult for ourselves.
4. Any work on a new Christian cosmology will be credible only if the traditions do it together.

In Europe, there is some anxiety Christianity is under attack and becoming a minority faith.  Is it possible, I ask, this might be an opportunity for European Christians to take a lead in developing a new cosmology? 

Finally, I have recently finished reading Richard Dawkins' The Greatest Show on Earth .  This is a brilliant popular account of evolution and a useful source of sermon illustrations!  I have never rated Dawkins as a theologian and often complained he does not disbelieve in any god I believe in.  It is reassuring somehow to read Dawkins' complaint that creationists do not believe in any theory of evolution he (or I) believes in.  It is hard to imagine a more monumental dialogue of the deaf.  One of his arguments against God struck me as particularly interesting and it will be my starting point in my next post.