The Abacus and the Cross, by Brown

I welcome the exploration of the "science vs church" tension.  The cliche, widely accepted as dogmatism in out time (witness the previous comment...) that the church was hostile to science, historically, is usually superficially explored.  If this topic interests you to a degree beyond finding further evidence to support the cliche, read "Sleepwalkers."  

Tension is historically, as well as today, often present in the attitudes of significant individuals rather than wider groups.  Sadly, in the case of Galileo, his recalcitrance made an issue of his attitude and that has evolved into a popular picture of "the church hates and disbelieves science."  As a devout Christian myself I believe "all truth is God's truth" and occasionally faith may be misaligned and need to be "re-described" to accomodate science.  

On the other hand, "Science" is not a monolithic truth, but a tentative "truth" that is adjusted in light of new evidence.  In addition, see Jonah Lehrer's "How Truth Fades..." in a recent New Yorker, where he explores how subsequent investigations of published science frequently fails to find the same data as the initial work. Not to mention, those doing science always work out of a specfii worldview, and often are dedicated to proseletizing their materialism or atheism or other -ism (see Dawkins for expressions illustrating this.)

Copyright 2011 Jay Reimer    (You can email me at jay.reimer@gmail.com