The San Francisco call., 1899-11-04
PARKHURST HAS
RADICAL VIEWS
ON PEDACOGUES
Claims They Do Not
Teach Religion.
COMMENTS BY PROF. JORDAN
RABBI vooRsANGER VOICES HIS
OPINION.
He Does Not Believe in Mixing Sci
ence With Religion-Rev. DR..
Spalding Expresses Pro-
nounced Ideas.
COMMENTS BY PROF. JORDAN
RABBI VooRsANGER VOICES HIS
OPINION.

Rev DR.. Charles H Parkhurst in his
sermon last Sunday morning in Madison
Square Presbyterian Church. New York
criticized teachers in colleges and schools
for ignoring religion in their treatment
Of scientific subjects. He said:
Il want to caution you against the un-
safe way of prosecuting natural scienti-
fic studies. No one is fit to teach natural
science in an institution nominally re-
ligious TO whom nature does not stand
rrst Of all as being the creation of Gods
handiwork and as being, therefore, a
constant revelation of some at least OF
the attributes of him from whom it
sprung.
Unfortunately there are great many
teachers in our educational Institutions
selected by Christian trustees with an
eye only to the scientific equipment
of the man they elect, but seemingly
with little concern for the effect which
scientific acumen, unaccOmpanied by pro-
found religious discernment is bound to
have in the way of converting the class
room into a seminary of infdels and athe-
lists"
The radical views of the eminent divine
We're submitted TO a number of we'll
known professional men yesterday, who
commented as follows on the propositions
set forth by DR.. Parkhurst in his dis
David Starr Jordan said:
College professors are very much like
other educated men. Most Of them are
employed to do very special lines Of
tn their business. In outside matters they
are also like other people. Some are
very religious and some are not at all. In
the same way some are deeply Interested in
political movements and others relatively in
different 10 them. The tendency Of thorough
study in any field is to turn men from emo
t"nalism from theological speculations and
IRON things that speedily pass away.
Truth is serious and stern and cannot be
N..tt fE mere enthusiasm. Exact training
teaches man that the methods of the dialecti-
l.au can give no sound results Hence the col
--Ee professor has little respect for the details
.t religious formulae and creeds In so far
preachers and sects define religion cere-
many, emotion or belief in abstract propositions
i'rHillated in uncrtical and metaphysical
terms, the college professor like any other
man Of affairs is Indifferent to 1t.
To the essentials Of wisdom virtue sound
conduct and the right relation of man TO his
l1.AeI, lhe average college professor is not in
-.ierent Many OF the wisest teachers Of reli-
gian ana morality to-day are college professors
ana their best teaching is shown in their vow
el poverty ana their lifelong devotion to the
worship OF truth. For To know truth Is reli-
Eian In itself One cannot teach religion by
TAX alone 1t takes a life behind It.
Rev. DR.. Voorsanger Of Temple Emanu-
FL discussed the subject as follows:
do not believe in mixing up science with ra-
lglon. Science and religion are taught by dfferent
methods. one IS pure classification of mental
them. 70 be adapted 10 the needs and condf-
tons of society, the other is instrument for
z
ol aIi ways pertaining 10 men. so that they
may live in harmony with one another and NAV
appreciate the great fact that God is ruler Of
eI. men 40 not mean 70 say that
science should not teach God nor
that religion should deny the ad-
Nantages OF scientific training in the work
that is before fl. But I cannot see the neces-
sity OF teaching science by religious methods
nor religion by scientific methods. The two
ara ssparate and distinct processes, probably
10 gain the same end but their methods are
separate and distinct. II that fact were more
appreciated probably DR. Parkhurst would rof
have any trouble. An atheistic teacher Of
science can do very little harm If the scientific
teachers or religion understand their business.
Rev. Dr.. Spalding, rector of st. Johns
Episcopal Church, holds that the power
of Almighty God should be recognized in
all studies, scientific and otherwise: that
as all power comes from Him, so this
power should be recognized. He thinks
that one OF the dangers of the day is
tendency TO the divorce of scientific
studies from the power OF God, and is
heartily in sympathy with a movement
which is on foot by which God should
be recognized, especially in the studies
Earnest Carroll Moore of the depart-
ment OF philosophy, University of Cali
fornia, said:
The charge that the scientist Is not relig-
lous man is very frequently repeated Ii has
always had certain justification In the past :
tt has "a certain justification now RELIGION
and religious men are always justified in pro
testing against the dogmatisms Of any scientist
who may 50 far forget his Hippocratfc oath
as % cease to be a scientist and become a rea-
s'FleSS asseTter concerning things religious
The scientist who ceases to be a scientfst is
fair game anywhere. There have been rna1v
SUCH though happily their number is ranidIy
hec0ming fewer Against such men protest is
a-"ays IN order but to assert that such pseudo
scientists nh the chairs Of state universities
is a m0nstrous untruth. For such an assertion
IS more than a criticism; it is an imDeach-
lnent oL the Intellectual integrity Of State
The charge does not state that certain forms
ol stufy-certain sciences are necessarily
atheistlc The curriculum Of a denominationaI
university lis the same as that Of a STATE mi
Fer=ity Of Ike rank. II is not then the bodv ~
IS some departure from them: ana tbis do9sst -
ure the real scientist cannot make for he must
SUCK 20 the facts. which 10 themselves are nor
objectionable. The charge then is that teach
ers 10 state universities are not scientists
"hIch as a general statement VIII instantly
he seen 20 be absurd That their work is Of
very high scientific value is everywhere ad-
Hltted- mat their methods are not consist
entity scientific has only to be stated to be al
once secuted everywhere
Stch charge almost always has a deeper
meaning, !. e.. that science and revelation are
inherently antagonstic. The theoloRfan is
sometimes inclined TO believe that God has
once and for all made known his will: the
scientist that the ultimate nature of things
yet remains 70 be discovered. But these are
botn halt truths. II God created the world II
is fair TO suppose that the student will fnd
him I'm his work. II God made himself knouin
70 human nun experience it is fair TO suppose that
ne sun does so. All search Is search for Cod
or the cause OF things But II always leads
Us TO revise our past experience and knowI-
edge Of God and here Is the rub
Those who would rely upon that which ~,
already know Of God condemned Anaxa 5orse
10 death because he taught that God was ons
and intelligent and Socrates they put to death
because Of his business. and Aristotle they
would have slain but that he fed to prevent
them from once again SHINING against those
who strcve TO get knowledge In Jerusalem
this conservative religious conscience
slew Christ a blasphemer It is stiIl dan
gerous thing to condemn honest INQUIRY for
one may XIII the friend Of man. But 1t is
always in order to convict the scorner wherever
he may be found, yet few will admit that he
IS peculiar 70 State universities
|