PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “RELIGION AND SCIENCE”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 343 records · Page 19Linked to original sources
PubMed2002

Should clinical pastoral education and professional chaplaincy become more scientific? It's a matter of salt.

I address the relationship of Clinical Pastoral Education (CPE) and professional chaplaincy to science by looking at the past in order to find meaning for the present. Specially, I explore the stories of Elwood Worcester, Anton Boisen and the beginnings of CPE. I conclude that these and other founding fathers believed that they were called to continue Christ's healing ministry and turned to science as means to do so although their relationship to science was often strained. Three issues emerge from the past that offer meaning for the present: the significance of a spiritual calling to do healing, the significance of science's "salt effect" as the means that makes a healing ministry possible, and the significance of faith as the identity around which a relationship with science is developed.

Chaplaincy Service, Hospital↗
PubMed1999

Is analytical psychology a religion? Rationalist and romantic approaches to religion and modernity.

The relationship between analytical psychology and religion is part of the larger issue of the relationship between modernity and religion. There are three main views on the issue. The fundamentalist position sets religion against modernity and opts for religion over modernity. What I call the 'rationalist' position likewise sets religion against modernity but opts for modernity over religion. By contrast to both views, what I call the 'romantic' position reconciles religion with modernity. Rationalists maintain that religion can exist only in so far as it serves as an explanation of the physical world, which the rise of science now precludes. Romantics maintain that religion, while serving as an explanation of the physical world till dislodge by science, is at heart anything but an explanation. The toppling of the religions explanation by the scientific one, far from dooming religion, prods religion into making explicit what it has in fact been all along. By this categorization, Jung is overwhelmingly a romantic. For him, the function of religion has always been more psychological than explanatory, and the rise of science does not preclude the continuing existence of religious myths as a psychological rather than an explanatory phenomenon. For those for whom science does spell the demise of religion, secular myths can replace religious ones, and those secular myths are more secular versions of religions myths than secular alternatives to religions myths. Yet even if for Jung religion can still exist today because religion is in fact psychology, it does not follow that psychology is therefore a religion.

Christianity↗