1
Final Reports from SinC Grantees
Church Name: First Presbyterian Church of San Diego, CA
Grant ID # 27
Co-Directors
1. Pastor: Jerry Andrews
2. Science Professional: Rebecca Flietstra
Church Address: 320 Date Street, San Diego, CA 92101
Phone #: 619-232-7513
Pastoral Email: jerry.andrews@fpcsd.org
Science Professional Email: rebeccaflietstra@pointloma.edu
1.
Provide a brief outline of the activities of your project. (Include numbers of participants, make up of audiences, and a description of any materials produced.)
The primary activity of the project was a series of adult educational experiences designed to foster and advance both greater knowledge of scientific insight on matters of importance to the Faith and a deepening conversation of the faithful regarding matters of scientific knowledge. We wanted both to learn and to discuss the ways of learning. We desired to increase our appropriation and appreciation of scientific inquiry as a discipline of the people of Faith.
To accomplish this, Rebecca Flietstra, member of the faculty of Point Loma
Nazarene University and member of the Session of First Presbyterian Church, designed and led three terms of classes for adults and offered them as part of the congregation’s Academy of Faith, the Sunday morning ministry of adult education. These classes were selected and in small part designed with the consultation of the senior pastor, Jerry Andrews. (Attached is the schedule of classes for the whole year.)
At the beginning of the year a six week course – Creation and Evolution – was attended by 18-23 adults most of whom were members, several of whom were scientists. (San Diego is a Navy town and thus a military town which employs many scientists whose expertise is in the applied sciences – engineering, physics, mathematics, etc.) The conversations revealed again what we knew – a wide range of opinions held sometimes tightly, sometimes loosely; an openness of mind; a good working knowledge of the ways of science (or at least some field of science); a seriousness of faith; a willingness to engage with others with grace and conviction.

2
Mid-year another six week course was offered – Biblical Personhood and
Modern Neuroscience. Though there were some present now who were not a part of the first series of classes and some who had been present earlier who were not now present, the attendance was again 18-25 for each of the six weeks. The conversations were less polemic (creation and evolution sets up a debate), the interest was keener, the lessons more novel. Matters of Faith were more theologically and thoughtfully explored. The class reasoned and thought together. There was little insistence on needing conclusions or consensus.
At the end of the year a final seven week class was offered – Human Biology and the Incarnation. Attendance was increased, averaging 25-30. A wider grouping of members attended including many whose knowledge of scientific matters was undeveloped but whose curiosity was sparked by regarding what it meant/means for the Almighty to become “truly human”.
Offering these classes during the Advent season helped attendance increase.
Several books that paralleled or introduced the subjects were given to the participants over the course of the year, and many others were recommended.
2.
Please indicate where and why these activities diverged in any significant way from your proposal.
Our original proposal included the writing of a curriculum for any repetition of these classes. Though the preparation by Rebecca was thorough and time consuming, the interaction of the participants with Rebecca and each other became the major dynamic of the time spent together and as such unrepeatable. Though it can be imagined that subjects addressed and questions asked could be recorded, they were judged by both Jerry and
Rebecca to be either so obvious or so particular to the adults gathered that a coherent curriculum was not possible based on our experience. We recommend the experience; we do not know how to replicate it.
3.
What would you identify as the primary successes of your project?
Silence leads to misunderstanding. The matters of Faith and science both collide and practice avoidance - perhaps avoiding contact for fear of collision.
Not only did knowledge increase, understanding increased of ways to learn, discuss, and imagine science within our community of Faith. We think when we pick this up again we will start where we left off and this appreciation will not be lost.

3
4.
Please reflect on any plans in your proposal that did not live up to expectations.
The immediate impetus to take up this conversation, now led by others with expertise in science and/or Faith, has not yet happened. The continuation of the conversation is still awaited.
5.
Name the impact your project had upon: a.
The Congregation
A significant part of our worshipping and witnessing congregation was engaged in these discussions directly and other members heard about and were intrigued by the conversations. In my estimation
(Jerry, the Pastor), reducing the fear of knowledge - a fear learned related to source (outside the church) and the history/habit of the conflict (science versus faith) - is an important matter of the practice of the Faith. Not all that pretends to truth is truth, but all truth is God’s truth. Discernment and curiosity both are virtues; developing critical faculties necessary. b.
Pastoral Leadership
Still new in this pastorate – less than two years at the time of the beginning of the project – I observed how my congregation interacts, processes and learns. I continue to be challenged and rewarded in my efforts, and am less baffled by it all. My own knowledge increased at the conference at Bidwell and my connections with the scientists in the congregation grew. c.
Science related professionals
This was the first time (at least as long as any remember) that scientists as scientists engaged in organized conversation together.
Nothing but good can come from that. Their discipline and calling was reaffirmed by pastor and church. d.
The larger community
Our congregation has a school, the City Tree Christian School, which is a significant part of our connection to our community. Over 200 students are enrolled through the eighth grade. The families – the great majority of which were not connected to us prior to enrolling their children – come to us for many reasons: excellent reputation; the parents work downtown where we are located; are in the military and know our connections; want a distinctly urban environment for their children (we feed 300 plus homeless neighbors on campus weekly); want a distinctly Christian education (we are self-consciously on the mission of learning to love the Lord with all our minds). These families are more than mildly curious about the intersection of faith and learning, science included. We teach both, and together.

4
Rebecca’s children are enrolled at City Tree. Our hope from the beginning was to have some impact on these families by supporting the school’s mission and helping the school to engage in healthy conversations around these matters. Invitations to attend the classes were extended to parents and some attended. The principal of the school was a regular participant in all three terms.
Further, we believe strengthening the science library of the school, which had a good start (middle school classes have been in existence for less than five years), would be a great help to the school and the families. Matters of the Faith and of science are better addressed now in and out of the classroom.
6.
What have you learned that would be important for others to know about the following: a.
What strategies are most effective in fostering a more substantive engagement between religion and science in the life of a congregation?
Leading with “creation and evolution” had its risks, but dealing with it first and well, allowing for disagreement and insisting on advancing not merely repeating the conversation, proved of great worth for all that followed. Affirming scientists within the congregation as disciples fulfilling their callings helped. Giving time between the three periods of sustained common reflection allowed time that was used for further and individual reflection. b.
What are the primary pitfalls pastors and congregations need to anticipate?
Either/Or is obvious. So too is “its all travel and no destination”; we know and are learning is more helpful. c.
What topics/themes get the most traction in relation to various audiences?
Things human were discovered to be fascinating – human personality and personhood, human biology and psychology – were new and engaging subjects.
7.
What resources (books, digital, individuals, etc.) did you find most useful and why?
While some books were given to participants and others recommended, the lectures and discussion questions were created by Rebecca Flietstra.
The single most used book was Darrel Falk, Coming to Peace with Science;
Bridging the Worlds Between Faith and Biology.

5
8.
If you were to submit your proposal for this project now, how would it differ from the one you originally submitted?
It is not clear to us still if we would have dropped the expectation of developing a repeatable curriculum at the beginning or held ourselves to that mission throughout. BioLogos was the identified publisher of the curriculum as imagined, but transitions within its leadership and our changed relationship to it diminished that possibility. We considered, after the fact, that videotaping might at least inspire others and perhaps give some general do’s and don’ts.
9.
In light of your experience through this project, please respond to the following question: Why is it important for congregations to cultivate a substantive engagement with religion and science?
The command of the Master is to “Love the Lord our God with all our minds”; all truth is God’s truth; science is part of knowing the world God has made and loved.
10.
Please add any additional comments that you would like to include in this final report.
This may be quite idiosyncratic, but I think not. This project, rightly named, was to acknowledge the rightful place of science(tists) in the congregation.
That is at most half the mission, I think, and the lesser half at that. The great commission, (and the great commandment), suggest that getting the
Faith(ful) into the scientific community is a necessary work of the people of
God. To be cynical, this project, especially the conference, seemed to be about making churches safe for evolutionary theory and science. I would be very grateful for a project that imagined making the lab safe for belief.
11.
Please attach a narrative budget report, not to exceed two pages, indicating how your grants funds were spent. If any funds remain, please include your plans for disbursement.
See below.
12.
Please provide a list and brief description of materials your church produced that could be shared with a broader community. If you have materials that cannot be submitted electronically, please mail them to the following address: 208 West First Street, Chico CA 95928 ATTN:
Scientists In Congregations a.
Examples: Curriculum, Sermon notes, videos, website links, article links, small group study guides, internal survey results, event
pictures, web traffic results, etc. b.
Please indicate here if you would not like your products shared beyond SinC without permission.

6
Budget Report
$9,200 was received 11/30/11 as 80% of the $11,500 grant.
$1,150 was received 12/31/12 as 10% of the $11,500 grant.
$5,000 was disbursed to Rebecca Flietstra for preparing and leading three adult forums;
$733.77 was spent on materials, mainly books, for adult classes.
$1,000 was spent to purchase books for the library of City Tree Christian
School.
Total monies disbursed equals $6,733.77.
Remaining undisbursed money received equals $3,616.23.
It remains our hope to host an event that reaches out to the community – neighbors, City Tree parents, friends of members, members of the scientific community – and offer an “Evening With…” a person of both science and faith, that includes an original presentation and plenty of time for interaction with the speaker.
We also imagine an event at and for the school with parents (some of whom are scientists) and teachers (especially the science teachers) and perhaps the middle school students in which the interaction of faith and learning (with the example being science) is discussed and the mission of the school bringing the two together is advanced. It is hoped this will help parents to engage their children more intentionally and confidently in the home.
Some materials may be purchased for either or both events.
The receipt of the remaining 10% of the grant - $1,150 – would determine which presenters could be effectively attracted, and that would influence the scale and attendance at the event(s).
Submitted by Jerry Andrews, acknowledging full responsibility for the report, its limits in concept and communication, and its belatedness.