CHAPTER VI

RELIGION AND SCIENCE

_Science, then, commands our respect, not on the basis that its

present assumptions and deductions are absolutely and for all time

true, but on the ground that its method is for all time true--the

method of discovery, the method of observation, research,

experimentation, comparison, examination, testing, analysis and

synthesis._

MAYNARD SHIPLEY, "The War on Modern Science."

_In the bare three and one-half centuries since modern science

began, the churches had conducted an unremitting crusade against it.

That much of this crusade had turned into a rear-guard action was

due less to the weakness of the defenders of the faith than to the

invulnerability of their non-resistant victim._

HORACE M. KALLEN, "Why Religion?"

Some sixty years ago in the "Dogmatic Constitution of the Catholic

Faith," the Church stated, "But never can reason be rendered capable of

thoroughly understanding mysteries as it does those truths which form

its proper subject. We, therefore, pronounce false every assertion which

is contrary to the enlightened truth of faith.... Hence, all the

Christian faithful are not only forbidden to defend as legitimate

conclusions of science those opinions which are known to be contrary to

the doctrine of faith, especially when condemned by the Church, but are

rather absolutely bound to hold them for errors wearing the deceitful

appearance of truth. Let him be anathema....

"Who shall say that human sciences ought to be pursued in such a spirit

of freedom that one may be allowed to hold true their assertions even

when opposed to revealed doctrine."

Can anything stronger be said to discourage research, investigation,

experiment, and retard progress? And only sixty years ago! It is but the

restatement of what the Church has uttered so many times and for so

long--that all knowledge, material as well as spiritual, is to be found

in the Bible as interpreted by the Church. It was this myth which had

stultified the mind of man for 1500 years (during the period in which

the Church was dominant); it was this that had killed the urge to search

and seek for the truth, which is the goal of all science, the means by

which humanity is set on the road to progress. This was the damnable

precept foisted on the minds of men which enslaved them throughout the

ages, and from which we are just emerging. This was the precept that

plunged the world into the Dark Ages, and retarded the advance of

mankind for centuries.

This is the reason that it is utterly impossible for the intellectually

honest scientist, and for that matter any individual, to reconcile

science with religion. On the one hand, that of religion, we have the

forces of intolerance, superstition, and the endeavor to besmirch,

repress, and ridicule every advance favorable to mankind; to cloak with

meaningless words obsolete rites, to stand in the way of human progress,

because it does not permit men to think boldly and logically. Science,

on the other hand, does not hesitate to tear down old conceptions, and

has only one motive, the ultimate truth. Religion has the purpose of

keeping the masses in the narrow and false path of only accepted

doctrines. The true scientist is the man with the open mind, one who

will discard the worthless and accept only the proven good. The

religionist closes his mind to all facts which he is unwilling to

believe, everything which will endanger his creed. Religion teaches the

individual to place all hope, all desire, in a problematical hereafter.

The stay on earth is so short compared to the everlasting life to come,

that of what interest is this life; all things are vain. The misery, the

suffering, of his fellow men leave him cold; he can only think of living

in the light of his narrow creed so that he may gain his future reward.

How well this philosophy has fitted in with the schemes of the select

few for the control of the many!

Truth to the scientific mind is something provisional, a hypothesis that

for the present moment best conforms to the recognized tests. It is an

evolving conception in a constantly changing universe. It is not that

science has attained true conclusions; not that the evidence at hand

must remain immutable; but that the scientific method of analyzing and

formulating assumptions on the basis of discovery, on ascertained facts,

is a superior method to the closed "infallible" method of "revelation."

These assumptions, based upon the known facts, lead to a working

hypothesis which in turn develops into a theory. If the theory is

adopted it must account for the facts known. But the theory is not held

as final, it is always changed or abandoned if necessary to conform to

the new discovered data. Science welcomes the critical attitude that

leads to the refinement of its theories. There may be today various

theories held by scientists in which they are mistaken, but the question

of the _method_ by which they arrive at conclusions can no longer be

under consideration with regard to its validity.

To the scientific mind, knowledge is something to be arrived at by study

and research. To the religionist, knowledge is something that is

contained in an infallible and supernatural statement or insight.

Religion exalts the transcendental; science manipulates only the

material. To the consistent religionist, his belief, as such, determine

the fact; to the scientist it is the evidence that establishes the fact.

To the religionist truth is something that is unchanging, that is fixed,

final, and heretical to question. Confronted with a constantly changing

universe, he would delude himself that his inner convictions give him a

finality concerning his evolving environment. It is therefore not so

much Science that the religionist is fighting, but the _scientific

method_. This scientific method of approach, he rightly perceives, has

so pervaded our mode of thinking that it is the subtle and most

disintegrating force that is shattering the religious foundations.

Dr. James T. Shotwell, speaking of the scientific method, concludes,

"But whatever strictures philosophy may pass upon the _conclusions_ of

science, as merely relative and provisional, there is no clearer fact in

the history of thought, that its _attitudes_ and _methods_ have been at

opposite poles from those of religion. It does no good to blink the

fact, established as it is by the most positive proofs of history and

psychology. Science has made headway by attempting to eliminate mystery

so far as it can. Religion, on the other hand, has stressed mystery and

accepted it in its own terms. Science is the product of bold adventure,

pushing into the realm of the mysterious to interpret its phenomena in

terms of the investigator; religion enters this same realm to give

itself up to the emotional reactions. Science is the embodiment of the

sense of control, religion yields the control to that power which moves

in the shadow of the woods by night, and the glory of the morning

hills....

"Science does not justify by faith, but by works. It is the living

denial of that age-long acceptance which we accord to the mystery--as

such. It renounces authority, cuts athwart custom, violates the sacred,

rejects the myths. It adjusts itself to the process of change whose

creative impulse it itself supplies. Not _semper idem_ but _semper

alterum_ is the keynote of science. Each discovery of something new

involves the discarding of something old. Above all, it progresses by

doubting rather than by believing." (_James T. Shotwell: "The Religious

Revolution of To-day."_)

_There has never been an advance in science of widespread importance

which in some manner or other endangered some mouldy religious concept,

that the Church has not bitterly opposed; an advance which in time has

proven of inestimable benefit for all mankind. A glance at the history

of human progress will reveal scores of such instances._

The two rival divisions of the Christian Church, Protestant and

Catholic, have always been in accord on one point, that is, to tolerate

no science except such as they considered to be agreeable to the

Scriptures. It was the decree of the Lateran Council of 1515 that

ordered that no books should be printed but such as had been inspected

by the ecclesiastical censors, under pain of excommunication and fine.

It is easily understood that having declared the Bible to contain all

knowledge both scientific and spiritual, and then passing a decree

ordering no books to be printed which did not agree on all points with

the Church's interpretation of the Bible, the Church was in absolute

control of all thought, both written and spoken.

It was to no advantage for the scholar to investigate any new fields,

for all knowledge which was possible for the mind to discover had

already been revealed in the Scriptures. Thus declared the Church. We

understand why it was that Copernicus did not permit his book to be

published until he was dying. We understand also that when Galileo and

Bruno had the courage of their convictions, and gave voice to their

beliefs, they were persecuted. Galileo was made to recant a discovery

that the youngest of children now takes for granted. Bruno was burnt at

the stake.

We know that astronomy was at a standstill under Church domination,

chemistry was forbidden, and the study of natural philosophy was

contradicted; while anthropology, which showed on what mythical

foundations the story of the fall of man rests, was squelched. The

attitude of the Church on geography was hostile to the truth, as witness

the persecutions of those who dared to venture that the earth was round.

Botany, mathematics, and geometry, as well as the natural sciences,

slumbered. Geology, which proved that the earth was more than 6000 years

old, was anathematized; archeologists had the greatest difficulty to

expound the truth concerning the antiquity of the human race. In purely

civil matters, the clergy opposed fire and marine insurance on the

ground that it was a tempting of Providence. Life insurance was regarded

as an act of interference with the consequence of God's will. Medicine

met the most strenuous of opposition.

It is impossible in this short study to analyze the specific forms of

retardation which the Church exhibited to all of these branches of

learning, whose only endeavor it was to search for the truth, to state

the facts, and to alleviate and make more bearable man's sojourn on this

earth. However, a few of the many instances of retardation on the part

of the Church will be pointed out.

The Necessity of Atheism · 第 6 / 20 章