CBN, Science, and Politics

When viewed closely, however, CBN‘s and Robertson‘s openness to science seems less about a conservative Christian paradigmatic shift and more about CBN‘s relationship with the public. CBN‘s devotion to engagement with mainstream culture inevitably requires engagement with science because science is inextricably interwoven into the secular realm, which Robertson hopes to influence. CBN is a mix of fundamentalist, evangelical, charismatic, Catholic, and Protestant Christians brought together by common politics fed by a shared theological vision: to integrate into and change society for the better. As part of its mission statement, CBN is committed to preparing the world ?for the coming of Jesus Christ and the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth? (Christian Broadcasting Network N.d.c.), and their methods for accomplishing these include converting as many people to Christianity as possible, keeping the holy land of Israel in the hands of Jewish leaders (per Revelations), and assisting Christians into positions of power. Robertson changed his university‘s name from CBN University to Regent University to reflect this missionary desire to foster Christian leaders who would direct the world‘s organizations as ?one who governs a kingdom in the absence of a sovereign? (Foege 1996:176).

[...]

This necessarily begs the question: what is ?science?? Science is a term that in public discourses is used alternately to represent a methodological approach to the natural world, an academic discipline (subdivided into various hard and soft sciences) and the community of people who adopt the methodologies, training, or practices of these disciplines. While this paper incorporates some of these elements in discussion, the primary goal is to define the category of ?science? as it is understood through dialogic practice at CBN. As Bakhtin points out, ?[t]here can be no such thing as an absolutely neutral utterance? (1999[1986]:128). Speakers bear a plan of where the utterance fits into the chain of speech communion between the speaker and the addressee, and this plan influences the speaker‘s lexical, grammatical, and compositional choices. By exploring the ways CBN members speak about and to science, the construct of an imagined ?Scientific Other? becomes clear.60

Several factors influence CBN‘s construction of and engagement with this Scientific Other. First is the historical mistrust and lack of understanding conservative Christians have of science and scientific theory. ?Science? has become a highly politicized category over more than a century of discord between biblical literalists and non-literalist secularists who sought to wrest political power away from Protestants by promoting scientific fact over biblical morality and belief in law, education, medicine, and other public realms. Through the twentieth century, fundamentalist and evangelical Christians have first ?opted out? of then ?re-entered? mainstream society, largely in an effort to avoid or combat scientific knowledge and the power it wields in society.

A second factor influencing CBN‘s engagement with science is the latter‘s undeniable social power and authority. In many ways science and its cultural trappings become recruited, whether for content or simply for legitimacy of form. Participants at CBN, just as at other religious institutions, frequently borrow scientific data to support their religious beliefs. While the archaeological record may be contested with regard to accepted biblical history, CBN media writers often report upon archaeological discoveries such as an ancient ship that appears to fit the description of Noah‘s ark. Yet, because of the hostility with which fundamentalist and evangelical Christians viewed science over the last century, a prevailing ignorance remains as to the actual methods and tenets of disciplinary science, even among ?mainstream? evangelical Christians61 like those at CBN or Regent University who comment extensively on science‘s flaws. As I will discuss, this is particularly evident in contestations of evolution and global warming, during which popular understandings of the phenomena, rather than scientific theories, are debated at length. Scientific data aside, the structure of scientific method, fact, and writing itself carries great authority, which is also borrowed. Whether in 700 Club broadcasts or Regent classrooms or blogs on CBN.com, participants adopt the apparently neutral form of ?science-speak? to lend weight to their assertions.

Perhaps the most important factor explaining the contradiction and complexity of science and religion at CBN is the process through which science and its components of ?technology? versus ?culture? are defined, segregated, and assessed. Science as a discipline or philosophical approach clearly has its own history during which its technologies of language, knowledge production, and engagement with the natural world were developed. However, the focus of this paper is less on the particulars of ?science? per se and instead is on the authority and influence of science as understood by CBN. Naturally, the organization‘s definitions of science are crafted with respect to themselves, and, through their own valuations of science and its social role, they simultaneously reveal their own insecurities, values, and goals within the public sphere. According to depictions by CBN media, professors, public commentators, and individual members, science is much more than a philosophy or system of technologies, it is a competing culture and social movement unto itself. ?Science? and ?scientific community? are repeatedly invoked by participants at CBN as representing a coherent, identifiable group with particular values and goals.

[...]

In numerous ways, CBN participants subtly separate out the data and technological products distilled through scientific process from their uses and interpretations, which are driven by the cultural framework of scientific practitioners. The latter is thus depicted as a competing cultural institution with similar motivations. Just as CBN seeks to convert the public to its worldview by wielding the authority of the Bible, science is understood as seeking to convert the public to its worldview (inevitably reductionist and atheistic) by wielding the authority of scientific method and fact.