Challenging Rev. Cram |

Challenging Rev. Cram

Dear Editor:

This is in reply to the Rev. Chuck Cram’s contribution of March 6, in which he chides you for considering Kenneth Ham’s creation evangelism seminars worthy of your attention, suggesting that you must be hard up for copy.

I, on the other hand, applaud you for doing so; my perspective is that the media has been ever eager to publicize the views of Christian revisionists like the Jesus Seminar, John D. Crossan, John Shelby Spong, et al. This is understandable, I suppose ” Christians who believe in Christ’s divinity, his redemptive sacrifice, and the authority of scripture hardly fit the classic “man bites dog” definition of newsworthiness. Such Christians, I would suggest, contrary to the Rev. Cram’s claims, represent the mainstream of Christian thought, and have done so throughout the ages.

I have met the Rev. Cram, have had cordial discussions with him, and am familiar with his views, but I must say I was grieved to read his invective against, “religious fanatics,” and his vulgar misuse of the term, “fundamentalist” as meaning extremist ” hardly appropriate language for one who claims “the ideals of inclusiveness.”

I know nothing of the Rev. Cram’s qualifications; obviously he is a properly qualified and ordained priest, but I assume he must have advanced scientific degrees to his credit also, since he enters the evolution/creation debate with such confidence and decisiveness. I do not; my degrees are in the arts and the social sciences and so must stand aside, but I am aware that some very heavy artillery is ranged on both sides of this controversy: professor Sir Fred Hoyle, emeritus head of the astrophysics department of Cambridge University, England; professor Chandra Wickramising, head of the mathematics department, University of Wales; and Dr. Colin Pattersion, former head paleontologist for the British Museum all entered the lists in opposition to the scientific conventional wisdom of evolution.

I have no desire to play, “I bet my scholar can whip your scholar,” but surely the Rev. Cram, who describes the Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong as a “theologian” must be impressed by the forces I have mentioned.

With regard to the Rev. Cram’s parting shot, “I suppose after the war on evolution grows tiresome the next target will be the law of gravity, and there will be a push to teach ‘intelligent falling’ instead.” When I last looked, Chuck, it was the law of gravity and only the theory of evolution. Has something changed?

Keith Gardner


Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

Readers around Aspen and Snowmass Village make the Aspen Times’ work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.

For tax deductible donations, click here.

Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.

User Legend: iconModerator iconTrusted User