Evening capital and Maryland gazette. (Annapolis, Md.) 1910-1922, 1919-03-17


MISS Eva Dorsey Carr has favored
the Evening Capital with q connuni-
cation which is TOO lengthy to publish
ID one issue and Ii has therefore.
been divided into three installments
which will be published consecntfveiy-
ne second OF the three instai iments
Oliows. Editor capital)
10 the Editor Of me Eveatng Capital:
The Catholic church IL, and has 81 q
ways been, the best friend n true
science she made cardinal Of Mich
oias de cara, and 4 benefited canon
of Copernicus. In the case Of Calico
the cardinals made mistake OF iudg-
nent which was shared By other
scientists at the sBlne. The stories OF
his torture and Imprisonment IL dun
geons and his saying. II does move,
are fctions. Calico was never even
for one hour IN such q prison lie
was committed 10 the care of q friend
and later under the wardenship Of his
own son, while the principal part Of
his punishment consisted In having 10
say the seven penitentian Psalms ~
uenance daily for some time. At that
period no astronomer or malhenatic-
ian was teaching the Copernican
theory. nor was it taught for long
time afterwards Ii was not the the
Eologians. but the astronomers and
mathematicians who refuse to accept
Copernicanism, and It was following
these that the church insisted that
Coperntcanism should be taught as q
hypothesis not as truth. OF course
the Calico case Is the one stock ex-
ample FOR antagonists OF religion, but
/ ii is really the exception which proves
the rule of incorporation to science.
since it is the one ease that can be
quoted IN many hundreds Of yeats. We
hear of the "theologium odinnl," but
but what nf the scientificum odium "
When any man Of genius advances q
new hypothesis he is under the ban
81 the thinkers of his time until his
theory is proved by demonstration ]
am not quarreliing with this condition
Tor 1t protects from charlatatis and
Iaaackery. am merely showing the
Injustice and inconsistency Of blaming
ItheoIogians for refusing to embrace
improved theories when scientists will
not do it. The church is not i4t0ler-
ant BIZ science, she Is no enemy Of
freedom of thought, but because she
stands soIidly for positive doctrine
and speaks with the assurance Of the
authority conferred upon her In mat
ters spiritual BY her divine founder,
Jesus Christ, she incurs the antago-
Inisnls 81 materialistic schools Of
science, as we'll as every other system
OF ethics that lead away from the Di-
ginity of Christ, His true mission and
relation to the world. She is ever q
thorn in the proud flesh Of the world.
There Is. d mystical reason for this.
Whenever there is friction between
science and faith 1t Is not because re-
lltgion is opposed To the experiments OF
science, but because science being in
capable of going any farther than the
natural, has declared war upon relig-
| I0us DGGduSS - GtA6A0lA PtO1AtllnAo .
supernatural life, and science can
only understand the natural and is es-
sentially agnostic, religion invariably
lincurs the enmity of science, and that
religion which is the most positive
and the most dogmatic about the SUI
pernatural Is the one most calculated
to rouse the ire Of agnostic science.
| In making these statements | am
not for an instaht forgetting or over
looking the fact that certain religion
lists have been intoIerant Of other
| thinkers and have been so foolish,
catholic and Protestant alike, TO put
leach other on the guillotine and the
rack. according to the civic customs
prevalent in past ages, nor the fact
THAT a few scientists have suffered at
the hands Of undermining reIigionists,
/ but that was not because religion Is
essentially opposed To science, but b.
| else certain religionists and certain
scientists misunderstood each other
and were more passionate than logical
over the issue.
Also in matters OF religion; it was
not until comparatively our own times
that people realized thought could not
be controlled BY the exercise Of force.
Ii gradually dawned upon the world
that discussion makes for progress
and enlightenment better an COM
pulsion. but ii was not until e Euro-
pean war that the world al last saw
the light DR.. Garner cites To actions
Id fCatholic bigots, In the middle ages,
and then applauds Luthur and the
other reformers as apostles OF free
dom Of thought. but as a matter Of
fact and discerning Protestant critics
| frankly admit tit was never
Luther's wish that there should be re-
ligious liberation for anyone but him
self. He denounced the papacy as In
tolerant and demanded full freedom
for the preaching Of his doctrine, but
he would not tolerate any other The
persecution and slaughter OF the
unabaptists under Luther's directions
/ IS an example OF his love for freedom
of thought! Luther was 8 great