Replies

I think the real issue has its roots in the fact that a great deal of the American religious landscape is dominated by various species of "sola scriptura" protestantism most of which arose not in the Western reformation, but in various post-'Englightenment' religious revivals.

This is a very interesting analysis, one which seems to me to support the view (about which I am undecided) that there is an element of American particularism evident here, arising from aspects of its singular history. I tend to resist this sort of view on the grounds that I believe the US is a compelling model for the world, that its strengths are grounded in its institutional forms (and thus can be replicated), and that its core values (freedom, democracy under the law, free enterprise, minimal government) are universally applicable.

My concern with "sola scriptura" Prostestantism --if I understand it aright--is that it cannot ultimately traffic with any other intellectual endeavour, least of all science. This, at least, appears to be part of the argument advanced by at least some scientists against ID, id est, it isn't science, it's an attempt to sabotage science. Yet the values I mentioned, and which I feel are essential to good governance, are above all else rational and pragmatic, should be intelligible to all on their own merit without reference to religious scripture or authority. But your posting has given me more to reflect on here; many thanks for that.

My concern with "sola scriptura" Prostestantism --if I understand it aright--is that it cannot ultimately traffic with any other intellectual endeavour, least of all science. This, at least, appears to be part of the argument advanced by at least some scientists against ID, id est, it isn't science, it's an attempt to sabotage science.

Your understanding is spot on.

My concern with "sola scriptura" Prostestantism --if I understand it aright--is that it cannot ultimately traffic with any other intellectual endeavour, least of all science.

Why do you think this way?

Your feeling is right, but the institutional forms of American life--freedom, democracy under law, free enterprise, minimal government--were all fixed before the bulk of the American religious revivals, at a time when the American religious landscape was more-or-less identical to that of contemporary Britain (though not England, the Scots Presbyterians filling in for the American Puritans).

The religious history of America diverged from that of Britain with Methodism--Wesleyans who set up their own bishops rather than remaining Anglican as the Wesley brothers did--and more so with the various Baptist revivals.

Sola scriptura protestantism need not become anti-scientific, but it must either become anti-scientific or secularized, not in the sense of embracing the world, but in the sense of allowing religion to be walled off from the world into a purely private domain.

Of course, there are American particularisms about the things you value in the American experiance. One is evident on FR: American conservatism, unlike continental conservatism or even Burkian conservatism, seeks to conserve the heritage of Western civilization up to and including the Anglo-Scottish phase of the 'Enlightenment' while resisting the continental 'Enlightenment' and all its radicalisms. Properly speaking, the word 'liberal' has been stolen from us by the American socialists. (Personally, I want it back.)