San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-01-18
CHURCHMEN FOR SCIENCE


fourth annual council of Texas kplsco-
palians. at Austin, indicate a reversal
of the respective attitudes which some
ecclesiastical and some secular mlnds
used to assume toward scientific theories,
particularly those in the field of biology.
In earlier times tolerance of such theories
was regarded as 'heresy by many rell-
oious teachers; they could not reconcile
tbe biblical account of the creation with
the scientific theory of evolution. On the
other hand, some scientists regarded re-
lioious organizations and members there
Of as obstacles to the advancement OF
science.
Now it seems that the old positions
thus defined have been exchanged by at
least two grouDs-the Texas Episcopal
ians. on the one hand, and certain mem
bers of the Texas Legislature, on the
other. For the resolutions adopted by the
diocesan council deplore the introduction
of an "anti-evolution" bill in the Legis-
lature.
That measure, according to press re-
ports, would forbid the teaching OF the
theory of evolution in the schools OF the
state. The council, in its resolutions, eN-
pressed the opinion that the bill cur
tails the right Of freedom of thought, Of
speech and of the press, which are funda-
mentally necessary for the preservation
of the institutions of higher learning" and
that "thc attitude taken by certain legis
lators. as expressed in this bill, would
tend to ALLEVIATE thinking people from the
= CrOEnRI tg11Oh1
by the church"
This development will surprise some
pcople-thosc who have adhered to the
old notion that the church must neces
sarilv be hostile toward any scientific at
tempt to explain the origin OF man anc
of other animals.
1t should not be surprising to anybody
however, to see modern Lawmakers eX
press the kind OF fanatical narrOwnes
evidenced by the attempt made at tn
Texas Capitol to limit the range OF man
thoughts. Although one cannot be Ger
tain, it is most likely that the author 0
the "anti-evolution" bill is not gradual
of any college or university. If he were
he would know that higher education
is largely process OF inquiry and in
vestigaton.
To expound a theory is not necessaril
to teach" it in the sense which the All
thor of the "ant-evoIution" measure ap
parently had in mind. 4 genuine educa
tor would feel that he had accomplishe
something worth while if he should sue
coed in stimulating the mind of a SUDDEN
toNthe point OF disproving a theory, Q
even of trying to disprove it. The latte
result would be more desirable than tn
students blind acceptance Of everythn
he heard or read.
Before a person can reach a reasone
decision as to whether any religious doc
trine and any scientific theory are II
compatible. he must be thoroughly f;
miliar with both of them. To prohib
universities from Stating and explainin
theories would be to build a high wa
around the mental activities Of the
students.
The position taken by the Texas Epi
copalians, however, is not singular Otht
ecclesiastical bodies have displayed a
equal degree of observation-disclosures 1t h;
remained for ignorant, unprogressiv
reactionary, narrow, bigoted law-make
to assume an attitude toward scientif
study and research which the most INTEL
gent of religious teachers regard as
rnl;c If the Darly Ace